Correction of the year?

« previous post | next post »

From the article "Trump brushes off widespread backlash" by Paul Koring, The Globe and Mail (Ontario Edition), Dec. 9, 2015, p. A13:

And the inevitable correction (The Globe and Mail, Dec. 11, 2015, p. A2):

Here's the tweet to which the article refers:

(Page images via PressReader. A similar correction ran in the online edition.)


  1. Dick Margulis said,

    December 11, 2015 @ 8:19 pm

    And Trump loves hate. And hate loves Trump. So most of the permutations are grammatical and synonymous. Well played, Hillary.

  2. TP Hogan said,

    December 12, 2015 @ 1:38 am

    Both versions are good, and a 2-day delay (!) in the correction allows us to savour each.

  3. oulenz said,

    December 12, 2015 @ 10:03 am

    Upon first reading, I thought this would be about the characterisation of Clinton as a less mainstream Republican candidate. I even have trouble getting the intended reading since for that I would want to repeat _against_ precisely to avoid ambiguity.

  4. Robert Coren said,

    December 12, 2015 @ 10:43 am

    Considering the extent to which correct use of the apostrophe has become arcane knowledge, any or all interpretations have a good chance of being what the writer intended.

  5. Terry Hunt said,

    December 14, 2015 @ 10:39 am

    @ Robert Coren.

    Though not, perhaps, when the writer is a qualified lawyer, amongst other things?

    (No actual dog in this fight, as I'm a rhs-of-the-Pond dweller.)

  6. Zizoz said,

    December 16, 2015 @ 12:52 am

    At first, I missed the lack of an apostrophe in the corrected version, and thought that the intention was simply to clarify that Clinton had not used capital letters.

  7. Jesse said,

    December 22, 2015 @ 11:58 pm

    Actually, the phrase in question was not in the tweet itself at all. It was part of an image obtained by activating a hyperlink (conveniently displayed as colored text on a white background) or viewed in the feed in small format in a graphics-capable browser (i.e. not Lynx or its ilk), placed after the text of the tweet. The Globe and Mail quoted the textual tweet incorrectly on both counts.

RSS feed for comments on this post