i newspaper, May 27, 2017
Some group nouns can be treated as singular or plural, for example ‘the jury was told’ or ‘the jury were told’, and often it comes down to a matter of which sounds better. I feel that the smaller the number, the more likely that treating the noun as plural is the better choice, because you visualise the group as a number of individuals. Some authorities differ, but I can’t bear ‘The couple was . . .’ Anyway, the one thing you can’t do is to mix singular and plural. Here we have ‘ . . . did not do enough to protect them’ and ‘The royal family was killed’. Obviously you could not have ‘ . . . did not do enough to protect it’ so the last line should have been ‘The royal family were killed’.
See ‘singular or plural?’ in Style Matters:
i newspaper, May 16, 2017
Why is it called ‘panda of the sea’? Why use this picture? It could be almost anything in the cetacean line. And what an unreadable way to start a story: ‘Critically endangered vaquitas . . .’
The Times did it right:
The Times, May 16, 2017
The picture shows the porpoise’s distinctive face pattern, and the intro is miles better, not giving the obscure name until it has established what kind of animal it is. The Times, rightly, has also put in the intro that it is the rarest marine mammal, which the i does not mention until the third paragraph.
i newspaper, May 18, 2017
‘Create’ means to cause something new to exist. Therefore the word ‘new’ is redundant. This is a common error, but in this case it is made worse by repeating ‘new’ in the intro. In fact ‘new’ or ‘newest’ appears eight times – far too many.
Daily Telegraph Sport, May 23, 2017, Page 1
Daily Telegraph Sport, May 23, 2017, Page 2
So was the Christmas party the beginning of Moyes’s problems or the last straw? I imagine the cover line was written by someone who had skimmed the story and got hold of the wrong end of the stick, not the sub actually handling it. A sub must always check cross-references, headlines or captions written by someone else.
The Times, May 25, 2017
Another convoluted and meaningless intro. I can’t even try to give a better version because the headline is not covered in the story. There is nothing in it about saving energy. This is a truly grisly effort.
Mail Online, May 10,2017
Apart from using ‘who’ twice, this heading includes the Americanism ‘pled’. In Britain we say ‘pleaded’. This would be better:
Page 1, The Times, May 6, 2017
Words fail me.
The Times, May 6, 2017
‘Sunk’ is the passive voice of the verb ‘to sink’. Examples would be ‘We’re sunk’ or ‘the ship was sunk by a torpedo’. This sentence requires the active voice, ‘as we sank into the mire’.
i newspaper, May 1, 2017
First, this story fails to mention where the incident happened. (It was Wolverhampton.) Second, ‘local’ is one of the most common superfluous words (others include ‘special’ and ‘up’). Of course the police officers were local. No reader would imagine they had dropped in from Manchester. And assuming that one of the officers is pictured with the survivor of the fire, which one is it? The reader should not have to assume or guess.
As I mentioned in the previous post, ellipses, or three dots, should be separated from the preceding word and each other by spaces, thus . . .
i newspaper, May 1, 2017
Devonians?! That is not a word to start a story with, unless you want to signal to everyone who does not live in Devon that they need not read on. In any case, it is wrong. Anyone feeding gulls may be fined, not just Devonians.
This would be my suggested intro:
Feeding the seagulls which flock round popular holiday beaches in Devon could now result in an £80 fine.
This story includes ellipses, or three dots. These should be separated from the preceding word and each other by spaces, thus . . .