Mea Culpa: Struggling to recall
When we moved from being a print newspaper to a digital one, we naturally had to let go of conventions that worked on paper but didn't translate to the new medium. Some that were kept are curious even to those in the newsroom.
The pull-quote – a line reprinted in the body of its parent story, in larger font than the main text – is one such curiosity. I think it was an effective tool in print, where it could jump off the page and draw a reader into a story. It can't do this in a digital story, where it is hidden until a reader scrolls down the page to a point where they can see it. Not to mention they have already clicked on the story.
But the pull-quote still has its advocates, who say it can break up a wall of text and draw attention to a line that might have been skimmed over. The latter argument was pushed to an extreme in a recent feature, where we placed a pull-quote directly above the same words in the body of the text. Thanks to Mick O'Hare, who did not skim over this shoddy placement.
I spy: Poor Greenland is back in the news for its trouble with the US president. A headline for a news in brief item read: 'Denmark recalls US ambassador over Greenland spying report.'
This suggests that Denmark was calling back its ambassador from Washington. Denmark was actually summoning Washington's ambassador to report to the foreign office in Copenhagen. We managed to get this right in the article.
As Richard Thomas notes, only the US has the power to recall its diplomats. If it were to do so at this time, Denmark would have to wait.
New direction: In a report on a murder trial involving a body buried under concrete we wrote: 'A forensics officer said he became suspicious after he noticed poured concrete that looked different and newer to other cement on the ground under the stairs [of the house]...'
We've used 'different to' interchangeably with 'different from' for years – not without controversy – but 'newer to' wouldn't be correct even if we swapped in 'from'.
In the US it would be acceptable to keep the pooled positional by writing 'different and newer than' but this would be unsightly to some readers in Britain. We could have gone with 'different to and newer than'.
But there was a simpler way: to say 'it looked different and newer' and allow the context to tell the reader that we meant this was in relation to the other concrete. Thanks to Paul Edwards for flagging this one.
Messing about in boats: Speaking of things that would be acceptable in the US, we once again used 'careened' in place of 'careered'. 'Careening' used to mean turning a boat on its side to clean it and, understandably, does not get used much in this sense.
As has been said before in this column, 'careen' has been misused as 'career' enough that it is now widely accepted to mean 'moving swiftly and in an uncontrolled way'. But there are many who prefer 'careering'. We have repeatedly pledged to stick with the original to keep everyone happy. Roger Thetford held us to our word.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
4 hours ago
- The Independent
Matteo Manassero and Ryan Fox surge into lead to set up intriguing final round at Canadian Open
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
Telegraph
5 hours ago
- Telegraph
The Danes have given up on their best warships: Lessons for the Royal Navy
Building warships is hard. To those who have been in one this will come as no surprise but for the majority who have not, and who see them like one's phone or car, then this is not well understood. A warship is a complicated assembly of many different complicated things, most of which need to be networked and connected to each other. Any given class of warship tends to be made in small numbers, too, and there may be major differences even between warships of the same class. The first Arleigh Burke class destroyers in the US Navy, for instance, were 8,400 tons: the latest are 9,700. To some extent, every warship is custom built. And they're so expensive that there isn't usually much scope for prototypes and extensive tests on them before building the actual ship. The Danes, however, do know all this, having lately found out just how difficult it is to get right. The Danish Chief of Defence recently announced that ongoing attempts to repair and upgrade the Royal Danish Navy's Iver Huitfeldt-class frigates will be abandoned. This is painful for the Danes as these three ships are the most modern in the Danish navy: and, on paper at least, they are the most capable. The reality, dramatically exposed in the Red Sea last year, is rather different. In the case of the Iver Huitfeldt herself, an integration failure between different weapons and sensors caused the ship's crew to lose the use of their air defence missiles for up to half an hour during a Houthi attack. They rebooted the command system and subsequently fired more missiles but in the hottest missile environment of recent times, this could have ended very differently. Their fallback option for shooting down drones – twin 76mm cannons – had similar command and control issues with 'up to half' the shells detonating too close to the ship to be effective. The then Chief of Defence was relieved of his position and the ship removed from theatre: red faces all round (which was better than the alternative). The problem was that a ship's detection and fire control radars, other sensors, command system, weapons and power delivery train all need to work as one and all at once. The search radar must find the incoming threat, it must then pass the information to the fire-control radar, the fire-control radar needs to get a lock on the threat, the missile system then needs that information – usually a human gets briefly involved here. Then a missile must launch and acquire the threat itself at some point, either using the reflections from the fire-control radar or its own active radar, or both at different times: or it may be guided initially by networked commands, possibly using information provided from a completely different ship, or an aircraft. Meanwhile the ship's installed generation must be powering and cooling all this kit reliably and in many modern cases driving the propulsion too. Good ships – the US Navy's Arleigh Burke destroyers and the Royal Navy's Type 23 frigates, for example – do all this well. Bad ships – the US Littoral Combat Ships and our early Type 45 destroyers before they were partly fixed – do not. One of the issues is that all the various systems may not originally have been built to work together. The Arleigh Burkes use Mark 41 missile launch tubes, originally built to work with the Burkes' Aegis combat system and its accompanying, hugely powerful radars: that configuration is proven and reliable. The Iver Huitfelts use Mark 41 tubes too, but connected to different, European made radars and command systems. In this case of the Red Sea failure, many fingers point at the Thales phased array radar's ability to talk to the command system, but the detail isn't as important as noting the complexity. The problem is obviously a deep-seated one, as it has evidently proved uneconomic to fix. One lesson that is crystal clear is that no feasible amount of laboratory work, peacetime testing and training can replicate the stresses and strains of combat. Whilst the gun issue was known about before, the missile fire control system problem was not, and only became exposed when real weapons were in the air. Our Type 45 destroyer operating in the Red Sea, HMS Diamond, had the opposite issue when it shot down a ballistic missile previously thought to be outside its capabilities. This is a nice surprise, but it was a surprise, and it shows again that you don't know until you do it for real. Looking back in time, we had terrible problems in the Falklands and in the Gulf with our old Sea Dart and Sea Wolf missiles. (The sole Sea Dart engagement of 1991, in which an antique Silkworm missile was shot down, was claimed as a success. It should be noted that the Silkworm had already – luckily – missed HMS Gloucester and carried on past before the destroyer managed to shoot it down.) The difficulty of weapons systems integration is also why I get a little nervous when plug-in or containerised systems are cited as a more flexible way of fighting ships in the future. On paper they can appear to be but if they don't integrate into the command system properly then you quickly end up with the Iver H problem. And by the time you've spent enough money to get around this, then maybe you should have just made that system part of the ship in the first place.
The Independent
10 hours ago
- The Independent
Presidential candidate shot and seriously wounded in Colombia, reports say
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
