The New York Times–described by a reader earlier today as “the junk-bond issuing, Mexican-controlled New York Times”–continues to decline. The paper’s grasp of history is illustrated by these corrections, just a few days apart. First, from a travel article on Friesland:
An article on Nov. 22 about the Dutch province of Friesland included a number of errors.
In reference to Friesland’s history, it was the feudal lords — not the Romans — who had no success conquering the Frisians in the 13th and 14th centuries.
Hey, they were only off by a milennium. Next, from today’s paper, an error that every American middle-schooler is taught not to make:
A television review on Friday about “Return to Cranford,” on PBS, misidentified, at one point, the period in which the story is set. As the review noted elsewhere, it is set in 1844 — the mid-19th century, not “the mid-18th century.”
Does the Times employ editors? Do they really not know these things? The Times is often referred to as an “elite” institution. But the real problem is that the paper is below average.
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.