BBC Ministry of Silly Walks

[nick_PASTIE]

And misinformation.

Spot the idiotic mistake, although it’s nice to have the publicity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43184473

 

[Monster Green]

Shoddy journalism. Probably got their information from The Herald!

 

[IJN]

Who the hell pays these people?

 

[Keepitgreen]

Who the hell pays these people?

Sadly, our licence fee. Brent Pilnick of all people.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

Unless it is your team, who ever remembers who were the runners-up?

 

[Tony Pastyman]

Yes 'Fake News'
I have sent the Beeb an e-mail asking them to correct the report by Brent Pillock sorry Pilnick!

 

[jarvo]

When you talk of shoddy journalism, if you read the match report on the Argyle website there are at least half a dozen errors, surely as a journalist you would proof read it at least once before you published it. Not the end of the world i know but just not very professional when it's on our official site. Now, let me just read this back before i press 'submit' :lol:

 

[GreenThing]

Unless it is your team, who ever remembers who were the runners-up?

It’s a journalist’s job to do their research.

 

[robin]

I understand the frustrations but I am more annoyed that I missed out on the Wembley win. Embarrassed to say that it didn’t even register we were playing that weekend.

 

[Vampires11]

and the error is??? I can't see it .............duh

 

[IJN]

When you talk of shoddy journalism, if you read the match report on the Argyle website there are at least half a dozen errors, surely as a journalist you would proof read it at least once before you published it. Not the end of the world i know but just not very professional when it's on our official site. Now, let me just read this back before i press 'submit' :lol:

Should have been a capital 'I' third from last word. Damn it you did so well. :greensmile:

 

[Keepitgreen]

When you talk of shoddy journalism, if you read the match report on the Argyle website there are at least half a dozen errors, surely as a journalist you would proof read it at least once before you published it. Not the end of the world i know but just not very professional when it's on our official site. Now, let me just read this back before i press 'submit' :lol:

Should have been a capital 'I' third from last word. Damn it you did so well. :greensmile:

And a capital I needed after "end of the world". Whatever happened to proof reading. :lol:

 

[jarvo]

When you talk of shoddy journalism, if you read the match report on the Argyle website there are at least half a dozen errors, surely as a journalist you would proof read it at least once before you published it. Not the end of the world i know but just not very professional when it's on our official site. Now, let me just read this back before i press 'submit' :lol:

Should have been a capital 'I' third from last word. Damn it you did so well. :greensmile:

And a capital I needed after "end of the world". Whatever happened to proof reading. :lol:[/quote]

I was asking for that :funny: just as well i'm not a journalist

 

[rsp4]

Wembley? Last season? Blimey missed that trip. Oh well I will have to go this season to watch the mighty greens

 

[The Doctor]

I’ve had work published and despite rigorous checking there is ALWAYS at least one small spelling or typographical error after publication no matter how hard you try to avoid them. Likewise, I don’t think I have ever read a book without spotting some kind of small error. Consequently, I wouldn’t be too hard on them for that type of issue, especially in something so rapid and ephemeral as a website news article. Getting established facts wrong is another thing altogether though.