And Doordarshan yet again
Writing to them about errors in their articles doesn't seem to stop them from producing shoddy pieces on a consistent basis; my letter to them:
Your recent article "BJP launches UP campaign"
(http://www.ddinews.gov.in/Homepage/Homepage+-+Headlines/BJP.htm)
contains some fairly evident grammatical errors.
> Talking to reporters in Lucknow after addressing a workers' meet,
> Arun Jeitley former Union minister and BJP general secretary
> said Kalyan Singh would be party's Chief Ministerial candidate
> for upcoming Uttar Pradesh assembly polls.
There's a comma missing after 'Jeitley' and before 'said'.
There's an article missing before "party's Chief Ministerial candidate",
and another before "upcoming Uttar Pradesh assembly polls.".
> It is probably the first election when the entire BJP top
> brass is pitched in for simultaneous poll campaign launch
> covering almost the whole state.
There's an article missing before "simultaneous poll campaign launch".
> In Varanasi Former national BJP president M Venkaiah Naidu
> said the party manifesto for the Uttar Pradesh assembly elections
> will be released after the festival of Ram Navami.
Why is the first alphabet of "former" in uppercase?
There is a missing comma after "Varanasi".
Thursday, March 29, 2007
DD strikes again
I write once again to point out the poor presentation of a news article on the Doordarshan website. The URL is http://www.ddinews.gov.in/International/International+-+Other+Stories/Navy+chiefs+seek+bullet+proof+cars.htm.
1. "Concerned about their security amid rising suicide attacks, the Chiefs of Pakistan's Air Force and Navy have asked the government to provide bullet vehicles to them. "
Here, one presumes the author means "bullet proof vehicles" and not "bullet vehicles".
2. "Presently, the air chief has a Mercedes car at his disposal but it is not bullet proof."
Incorrect punctuation, "the air chief" should be "the Air Chief".
3. "....on Vice Chief of Army Staff (VCOAS) Lt-Gen Ahsan Salim Hayat, who was then Corps Commander Karanchi."
I'm not sure what Karanchi is, but it doesn't sound like the name of a Corps, like XII Corps etc.. Is it the location of the Corps HQ? The officer in question did command V Corps, which is based in Karachi. I can only presume that this is a typograhical error, and also one of nomenclature.
I write once again to point out the poor presentation of a news article on the Doordarshan website. The URL is http://www.ddinews.gov.in/International/International+-+Other+Stories/Navy+chiefs+seek+bullet+proof+cars.htm.
1. "Concerned about their security amid rising suicide attacks, the Chiefs of Pakistan's Air Force and Navy have asked the government to provide bullet vehicles to them. "
Here, one presumes the author means "bullet proof vehicles" and not "bullet vehicles".
2. "Presently, the air chief has a Mercedes car at his disposal but it is not bullet proof."
Incorrect punctuation, "the air chief" should be "the Air Chief".
3. "....on Vice Chief of Army Staff (VCOAS) Lt-Gen Ahsan Salim Hayat, who was then Corps Commander Karanchi."
I'm not sure what Karanchi is, but it doesn't sound like the name of a Corps, like XII Corps etc.. Is it the location of the Corps HQ? The officer in question did command V Corps, which is based in Karachi. I can only presume that this is a typograhical error, and also one of nomenclature.
Appalling pieces of editing - Doordarshan
I'm shocked at the appalling lack of professionalism I'm dismayed to witness in what might be regarded as India's flagship media outlet. The letter I wrote to them follows:
Your recent article http://www.ddinews.gov.in/Homepage/Homepage+-+Headlines/bermuda.htm "Millions of Indians praying for our victory: Bermuda captain" published on Sunday 25 March 2007 contained a large number of faults - grammatical errors and misspelt words.
> In a highly improbable scenario in case Bermuda wins againsd Bangladesh then India has a chance
> to make it to the super eights and this very thought that hopes of a mighty country of one billion
> people rest on one of the smallest nation in the world makes Romaine happy.
Complete lack of punctuation here. Choose perhaps "In the highly improbable scenario that Bermuda wins...." or "In a highly improbable scenario - the case that Bermuda wins......"
Against, not againsd.
> ''Millions of Indian supporters will be backing us, it's good to have this Additional support,'' he told
> newspersons at Queen's park Oval after team's work out.
Why is the first letter of 'additional' capitalized?
The article before "team's work out" is missing.
> We've suffered two big losses, but we're looking to finish with a win tomorrow,'' he said with a chuckle.
The reported speech here should end with a period, not a comma.
> Romaine was thrilled that ''Bermuda fans appreciate what we've achieved by qualifying for
> the World Cup, and was confident that things will improve for Bermuda cricket after this exposure.
Incorrect switch from reported to direct speech. This is unforgiveable, at least on a professional's part. Or do you employ bored schoolchildren?
> ''The lack of good pitches back home has meant that we've played all our games away durinf the
> past year. As amatdurs, we're `lways relaxed in our approach.
During, not durinf.
Amateurs, not amatdurs.
Always, not 'lways.
> 'It's an important game for us as we low have a chance of advancing to the Super 8s.
Now, not low.
Also, the terminating double-quote is misplaced.
> So expect our nerves will be okay going for this tie.
Missing terminating double-quote.
> MaKilg the Super 8s will be a very significant moment for Bangladesh cricket,
Making, not MaKlig.
> Cricket's a big game back home. people back home are waiting for us to enter the Super 8s.It
> will make them happy,''Bashar said.
When starting a new sentence, the first letter of the first word ought to be in upper case. Hence "People", not "people".
A space is required between the period and the start of a new sentence. Hence "Super 8s. It will", not "Super 8s.It will".
A space is also required between a terminating double quote and the next word.
Hence *happy," Bashar said* and not *happy,"Bashar said*.
The reported speech here should end with a period, not a comma.
All this is bad enough - I've noticed shoddy editing of this sort on a fairly consistent basis. I wish I could offer some words of encouragement alongwith what I hope is castigation sufficient to cause you to take your editorial team to task. Perhaps even ask them to consider another line of work - as professional snake charmers, or assistant window cleaners; they seem to be entirely at sea with their current calling.
I'm shocked at the appalling lack of professionalism I'm dismayed to witness in what might be regarded as India's flagship media outlet. The letter I wrote to them follows:
Your recent article http://www.ddinews.gov.in/Homepage/Homepage+-+Headlines/bermuda.htm "Millions of Indians praying for our victory: Bermuda captain" published on Sunday 25 March 2007 contained a large number of faults - grammatical errors and misspelt words.
> In a highly improbable scenario in case Bermuda wins againsd Bangladesh then India has a chance
> to make it to the super eights and this very thought that hopes of a mighty country of one billion
> people rest on one of the smallest nation in the world makes Romaine happy.
Complete lack of punctuation here. Choose perhaps "In the highly improbable scenario that Bermuda wins...." or "In a highly improbable scenario - the case that Bermuda wins......"
Against, not againsd.
> ''Millions of Indian supporters will be backing us, it's good to have this Additional support,'' he told
> newspersons at Queen's park Oval after team's work out.
Why is the first letter of 'additional' capitalized?
The article before "team's work out" is missing.
> We've suffered two big losses, but we're looking to finish with a win tomorrow,'' he said with a chuckle.
The reported speech here should end with a period, not a comma.
> Romaine was thrilled that ''Bermuda fans appreciate what we've achieved by qualifying for
> the World Cup, and was confident that things will improve for Bermuda cricket after this exposure.
Incorrect switch from reported to direct speech. This is unforgiveable, at least on a professional's part. Or do you employ bored schoolchildren?
> ''The lack of good pitches back home has meant that we've played all our games away durinf the
> past year. As amatdurs, we're `lways relaxed in our approach.
During, not durinf.
Amateurs, not amatdurs.
Always, not 'lways.
> 'It's an important game for us as we low have a chance of advancing to the Super 8s.
Now, not low.
Also, the terminating double-quote is misplaced.
> So expect our nerves will be okay going for this tie.
Missing terminating double-quote.
> MaKilg the Super 8s will be a very significant moment for Bangladesh cricket,
Making, not MaKlig.
> Cricket's a big game back home. people back home are waiting for us to enter the Super 8s.It
> will make them happy,''Bashar said.
When starting a new sentence, the first letter of the first word ought to be in upper case. Hence "People", not "people".
A space is required between the period and the start of a new sentence. Hence "Super 8s. It will", not "Super 8s.It will".
A space is also required between a terminating double quote and the next word.
Hence *happy," Bashar said* and not *happy,"Bashar said*.
The reported speech here should end with a period, not a comma.
All this is bad enough - I've noticed shoddy editing of this sort on a fairly consistent basis. I wish I could offer some words of encouragement alongwith what I hope is castigation sufficient to cause you to take your editorial team to task. Perhaps even ask them to consider another line of work - as professional snake charmers, or assistant window cleaners; they seem to be entirely at sea with their current calling.
Could not be reached for comment
Consider the statement in a news-article:
"A Dell spokesperson could not be reached for comment."
snipped from the article "Dell launches low-cost PC in China " (at http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/03/21/HNdelllowcostpcchina_1.html).
This is plainly incorrect, for in any reasonable universe, it will always have been possible to reach a Dell spokesperson.
Consider an expedition to locate an incarnadine unicorn. It's possible one may not find one such a beast, and one may said that "a unicorn was not found". One may not say "a unicorn could not be found", for it's quite possible that a herd (or appropriate collective noun) of unicorns was grazing across the street, the vista blocked by a giant hoarding. Hence a unicorn could indeed be found, even though it was not.
For "could not be" implies that a unicorn cannot exist (or rather, could not have existed). My thesis is that a unicorn can exist, and Dell spokespersons can be reached.
This is not pedantry, but an insistence upon truth (or upon the desire for truth).
The statement "A Dell spokesperson could not be reached for comment." reeks of perfidy. My brother mislaid the phonebook, and so I couldn't find Dell's number. I called Dell, but they put me on hold for three whole minutes and I lost patience. I was busy finding my grill for summer. Dell was too busy. Dell didn't give me a free T-shirt and a return ticket to Hawaii. Dell is not obliged to answer everyone who calls or writes to them. I failed to get a response from Dell, and went ahead with my piece anyway, as I don't get paid if I don't publish. The hotel where I was staying had a problem with their switchboard, and kept routing me to a pizza delivery firm in Lisbon, instead of to the Dell customer relations number.
One can accept this sort of thing only if a reasonable attempt was made, over a reasonable period of time. However, this is very subjective, and unless this information is also provided alongwith the article, I suggest the path of greatest truth be taken, and "could not" in such cases be replaced by a "was not". If Dell was contacted, and they refused, then one may state that. As long as the journalist realizes that this refusal is no great assault against freedom of speech, or any civil liberty; on the contrary, it is the exercise of freedom. The freedom to refuse contact with the distasteful, or impertinent - or merely because one chooses so.
Consider the statement in a news-article:
"A Dell spokesperson could not be reached for comment."
snipped from the article "Dell launches low-cost PC in China " (at http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/03/21/HNdelllowcostpcchina_1.html).
This is plainly incorrect, for in any reasonable universe, it will always have been possible to reach a Dell spokesperson.
Consider an expedition to locate an incarnadine unicorn. It's possible one may not find one such a beast, and one may said that "a unicorn was not found". One may not say "a unicorn could not be found", for it's quite possible that a herd (or appropriate collective noun) of unicorns was grazing across the street, the vista blocked by a giant hoarding. Hence a unicorn could indeed be found, even though it was not.
For "could not be" implies that a unicorn cannot exist (or rather, could not have existed). My thesis is that a unicorn can exist, and Dell spokespersons can be reached.
This is not pedantry, but an insistence upon truth (or upon the desire for truth).
The statement "A Dell spokesperson could not be reached for comment." reeks of perfidy. My brother mislaid the phonebook, and so I couldn't find Dell's number. I called Dell, but they put me on hold for three whole minutes and I lost patience. I was busy finding my grill for summer. Dell was too busy. Dell didn't give me a free T-shirt and a return ticket to Hawaii. Dell is not obliged to answer everyone who calls or writes to them. I failed to get a response from Dell, and went ahead with my piece anyway, as I don't get paid if I don't publish. The hotel where I was staying had a problem with their switchboard, and kept routing me to a pizza delivery firm in Lisbon, instead of to the Dell customer relations number.
One can accept this sort of thing only if a reasonable attempt was made, over a reasonable period of time. However, this is very subjective, and unless this information is also provided alongwith the article, I suggest the path of greatest truth be taken, and "could not" in such cases be replaced by a "was not". If Dell was contacted, and they refused, then one may state that. As long as the journalist realizes that this refusal is no great assault against freedom of speech, or any civil liberty; on the contrary, it is the exercise of freedom. The freedom to refuse contact with the distasteful, or impertinent - or merely because one chooses so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)