Dr Narendra Sharma
In our article of 30 March 2009, Doctor 'abused abortion patients', we reported allegations of sexual assault by Dr Sharma during a criminal trial, but did not report on the outcome. Dr Sharma was found not guilty of all charges and the trial judge stated that he could 'leave the Court without a stain on [his] character'. We are happy to set the record straight and apologise to Dr Sharma for the distress and embarrassment caused.”
Are sections of the British press increasing tensions within communities by publishing negative stories about Muslims?
...why are newspapers publishing distorted, islamophobic stories that provoke far-right extremists? Should the Press Complaints Commission impose tougher sanctions? Or do editors need to take more responsibility for the consequences of what they print?
Neither the Daily Mail, Telegraph, Star or Sun wished to appear on the programme today, and the editor of the Express was simply 'too busy'.
In yesterday’s Independent, Ian Herbert attributed quotes to the ITV football analyst Andy Townsend which suggested that he had made sexist comments on Twitter as part of the Andy Gray/Richard Keys story.
Those quotes originated from a spoof Twitter account. We apologise for any embarrassment caused to Mr Townsend, who has no connection to the @AndyDTownsend account.
The "most depressing day of the year" began life as a "wacky academic" equation story. This is the kind of thing PR companies offer as "advertising equivalent exposure" for companies who want their brand in the papers.
The equation stunt was not the work of an academic, it was paid for by Sky Travel, and Blue Monday comes just after your first pay cheque arrives, the perfect time to book a holiday.
And the Mail:
The study of office workers aged between 18 and 45 quizzed respondents on their level of stress throughout the typical working week.
It found a quarter regularly feel stressed at work and for three quarters of workers they regularly come to the end of their tether by 11.16am each day. But one in five find it gets too much before nine o'clock.
Four in ten blamed heavy workloads and a third said dealing with difficult clients or customers left them feeling frazzled.
Yet three in ten admitted it was their boss which caused them tension in the office and one in six blamed their colleagues for not listening to their cries for help.
The study of office workers aged between 18 and 45 quizzed respondents on their level of stress throughout the typical working week.
It found a quarter regularly feel stressed at work and for three quarters of workers they regularly come to the end of their tether by 11.16am each day. But one in five find it gets too much before nine o'clock.
Four in ten blamed heavy workloads and a third said dealing with difficult clients or customers left them feeling frazzled.
Yet three in ten admitted it was their boss which caused them tension in the office and one in six blamed their colleagues for not listening to their cries for help.
[The agency] has just launched a smartphone app designed to take the stress out of finding a new job.
Young children are to be taught about homosexuality in their maths, geography, science and English lessons, it has emerged.
As part of a Government-backed drive to ‘celebrate the gay community’, maths problems could be introduced that involve gay characters.
In geography classes, students will be asked why homosexuals move from the countryside to cities – and words such as ‘outing’ and ‘pride’, will be used in language classes.
The lesson plans are designed to raise awareness about lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual issues and, in theory, could be used for children as young as four.
Although the lesson plans are not compulsory, they are backed by the Department for Education and will be available for schools to download from the Schools Out website.
A Department for Education spokesman added: ‘These are optional teaching materials.'
schoolchildren are to be bombarded with homosexual references in maths, geography and science lessons as part of a Government-backed drive to promote the gay agenda.
Alas, this gay curriculum is no laughing matter. Absurd as it sounds, this is but the latest attempt to brainwash children with propaganda under the camouflage of education. It is an abuse of childhood.
And it’s all part of the ruthless campaign by the gay rights lobby to destroy the very concept of normal sexual behaviour.
How can you top the claim that mentioning gay people in passing in a textbook question equates to "an abuse of childhood"?
As the old joke has it, what was once impermissible first becomes tolerated and then becomes mandatory.
...values which were once the moral basis for British society are now deemed to be beyond the pale.
What was once an attempt to end unpleasant attitudes towards a small sexual minority has now become a kind of bigotry in reverse.
Expressing what used to be the moral norm of Western civilisation is now not just socially impermissible, but even turns upstanding people into lawbreakers.
Almost two thirds of homosexual pupils in Britain's schools have suffered homophobic bullying...Almost all of those had experienced verbal bullying but 41% had been physically attacked, while 17% said they had received death threats.
fall[en] foul of the gay inquisition.
It seems that just about everything in Britain is now run according to the gay agenda.
the seemingly all-powerful gay rights lobby carries all before it.
Melanie Phillips' latest article. Blimey. Can we build a paywall round the Daily Mail website to keep the articles in?
importance of responsible reporting of mental health issues.
Ask people who have been diagnosed with a mental illness – especially a serious one like Schizophrenia – what they think about media coverage of the issue and certain words come up time and again. Words like: 'offensive', 'stigmatising', 'sensationalist', 'inaccurate' and 'distorted'...
The natural next question to ask is: why? Why is it that this overwhelming sense of negativity is what people are left with when they read newspapers or watch television programmes where mental illness is featured?
...
To find an eloquent summing up of why what is written and reported by the media matters we need look no further than the seminal book by Otto Wahl, "Media Madness."
In it Wahl writes: "Media depictions, in their persistent and pervasive inaccurate stereotypes perpetuate the negative attitudes of the public toward people who experience mental disorders and thus help to maintain the stigma, rejection and discrimination that has added to their burden.
"For people with mental illness the images of mental illness that the media currently present have very important, very personal, and very painful consequences."
Oh, I forgot to mention The King’s Speech’s worst crime of all. One scene has Helena Bonham Carter’s bitchy Queen Elizabeth trying to strike up a rapport with Lionel Logue’s children by asking: ‘Do you like Sooty?’
Sooty...in the Thirties? Actually that most malevolent of glove puppets didn’t come along until 1948 with his hammer and ink squirt and magic words: ‘Izzy-wizzy, let’s get busy.’
Izzy-wizzy...once again a scriptwriter didn’t get busy enough.
- The lovely Queen Mum said (quite in keeping with the times) "would you like a sweetie?" I'm a southern girl straight out of Dixie and even I understood what she meant.
- Get a life, as you're a pretty poor critic and a deaf one. Sweeties not Sooty!!!!
- Well when I saw the film I heard "Do you like SWEETIES" not "Do you like Sooty"! One of us heard it wrong, Mr Norman.
- Philip Norman, you're an idiot. She doesn't say "do you like Sooty?", she says "do you want a sweetie?".
- Gasp! Another shock expose from the Daily Mail - "Film is work of fiction!" Whatever next?
- Did you actually watch the kings speech? Queen Elizabeth was hardly bitchy. And she was asking the boy, who was one of Logue's patients, not his son, whether he liked SWEETIES.
- Sweeties, Mr Norman; not Sooty.... when writing an article about innacuracy, surely facts should be triple-checked?
- How is this journalism?
By Friday morning Eastern time, the Daily Mail had removed the byline of reporter Liz Thomas from the piece, which itself had been edited and cut down significantly from its original form sans the lifted Times text.
But Thomas told The Cutline via email: "This has nothing to do with me. I did not write the piece at all. I am away on holiday."
So what happened here?
"I can tell you that an inquiry is underway to discover how this happened and [we will] deal with the matter appropriately," said Charles Garside, assistant editor at the Daily Mail, who noted that the following erratum was being appended to the piece: "An earlier version of this article was mistakenly attributed to the writer Liz Thomas. We also regret that a revised version of the article also failed to attribute the source to the New York Times."
Many of these devices transmit a signal, and all of them emit electromagnetic waves, which, in theory, could interfere with the plane’s electronics. At the same time, older planes might not have the best shielding against the latest generation of devices, some engineers said.
Most personal devices transmit a signal and all of them emit electromagnetic waves which, in theory, could interfere with the plane’s electronics. At the same time, older planes might not have the best protection against the latest generation of devices.
Safety experts suspect that electronic interference has played a role in some accidents, though that is difficult to prove. One crash in which cellphone interference with airplane navigation was cited as a possible factor involved a charter in Christchurch, New Zealand, in 2003. Eight people died when the plane flew into the ground short of the runway.Mail:
The pilot had called home, and the call remained connected for the last three minutes of the flight. In the final report, the New Zealand Transport Accident Investigation Commission stated, “The pilot’s own cellphone might have caused erroneous indications” on a navigational aid.
Safety experts suspect that electronic interference has played a role in some accidents, although it is difficult to prove.
One crash in which mobile phone interference with a plane's navigation was cited as a possible factor involved a 2003 flight in Christchurch, New Zealand.
Eight people died when the plane flew into the ground short of the runway.
The pilot had phoned home, and the call remained connected for the last three minutes of the flight.
In the final report, the New Zealand Transport Accident Investigation Commission stated, 'The pilot’s own cellphone might have caused erroneous indications' on a navigational aid.
Since 2000, there have been at least 10 voluntary reports filed by pilots in the United States with the Aviation Safety Reporting System, administered by NASA. In 2007, one pilot recounted an instance when the navigational equipment on his Boeing 737 had failed after takeoff. A flight attendant told a passenger to turn off a hand-held GPS device and the problem on the flight deck went away.
Since 2000, there have been at least 10 voluntary reports filed by pilots in the U.S. with the Aviation Safety Reporting System, administered by NASA.
In 2007, one pilot recounted an instance when the navigational equipment on his Boeing 737 had failed after takeoff.
A flight attendant told a passenger to turn off a hand-held GPS device and the problem on the flight deck went away.
At American Airlines, people dialed cellphones from out-of-service planes parked at various airports. “They found no interaction with the aircraft instruments on any aircraft type,” said Tim Smith, a spokesman for American.
As a result, the airline like most others, decided to permit the use of phones at the gate before departure and after landing.
At American Airlines, people dialed cellphones from out-of-service planes parked at various airports.
'They found no interaction with the aircraft instruments on any aircraft type,' said Tim Smith, a spokesman for American Airlines.
As a result the airline, like most others, decided to allow permit the use of phones at the gate before departure and after landing.
The saucy pair [Vanessa and her guest] forgot the cameras were there and started littering their chat with X-rated innuendo.
They giggled like schoolgirls as they cracked naughty jokes about “screwing”, “hammering things in”, and “inserting drills in and out”.
New to the market last week comes The Vanessa Show (Five, Monday-Friday), the most promising new show in daytime television. Vanessa Feltz is the busiest presenter around with a brace of radio shows on the BBC, a newspaper column for the Daily Express and now a daytime chat/magazine show.
Billed as the “Queen of Morning TV”, there’s little doubt that Vanessa has ample energy and brims with confidence on the sofa. Her break from television has given her a new chutzpah.
However, the best feature of her presentation style is that she doesn’t fall into the common trap of worshipping celebrities like modern-day saints (Lorraine being by far the worst offender, followed by This Morning).
First up on the sofa was former Pussycat Doll Kimberly Wyatt from Sky’s Got To Dance. Vanessa confronted the singer/dancer-turned-reality judge with this friendly gambit: “I would quite like to hate you!” What?
The presenter went on to explain how Kimberly, with her model looks, must make women insanely jealous to the point of “hate”.
The show also features Vanessa’s fiancé Ben, who chimes in at various points, and a life coach who, most surprisingly, speaks a lot of sense if you believe in that sort of stuff. At least his first “patient” in Reading appeared to have discovered how to use a webcam.
So, all in all, and in the words of Len Goodman, “Good job!”
Vanessa Feltz’s new TV show has caused a sexy stir and seen ratings soar in its first week. Saucy Danielle Lineker even left the telly host, 48, lost for words by confessing husband Gary had caught her in a compromising position with another fella. The model spilled the beans on yesterday’s The Vanessa Show on Channel 5.
The babe is just one of the guests who have spiced up Vanessa’s new show – on at 11am, Monday to Friday every week – and fans can expect more revelations next week. Guests include Liz McClarnon, 29, on Monday, Hayley Tamaddon, 33, on Tuesday and Myleene Klass, 32, on Wednesday.
Of all the the journalists in Britain you would want to write about the Joanna Yeates murder, Liz Jones is probably nestling somewhere near the bottom of the list. You might think, after all, that Jones' penchant for consumerist superficiality and ill-directed moaning doesn't quite carry the gravitas required to really deal with such a case of genuine human tragedy and emotion. Well, you'd be right.
It's Friday night and I’m in the Ram bar on Park Street in Bristol.
This is where Joanna Yeates spent her last evening...
The bar is OK but ordinary. The wine list, chalked on a board, says ‘Lauren Perrier’.
I wish she had spent what were probably her last hours on earth somewhere lovelier.
I find Tesco, and go in. I almost buy that upmarket pizza; the choice tells me Jo wanted a lovely life, something above the ordinary.
Isn’t it interesting that you can snatch a young woman’s life away from her in the most violent, painful, frightening way possible, take away her future children, her future Christmases, take away everything she loves, and yet there are elaborate systems in place to ensure you do not cross a bridge for only 30 pence?
Well...no. No, that isn't interesting. It's irrelevant, facile and absurd. Bridge tolls are no more relevant to this murder than the tooth fairy is. There is no sad irony, no lingering meaning to be found here...[it's] possibly the weirdest paragraph I have ever read in a national newspaper column.
Newsdesks and subeditors are asked to note that decisions of the European Court of Human Rights should not be referred to as EU decisions, and the judgements should not be attributed to “EU judges”, or any similar language. The European Court of Human Rights is part of the Council of Europe, a completely separate organisation to the European Union. The UK is a founding member of the Council of Europe, which was created in 1949 by the Treaty of London.
why we must rescue our country from EU dictators.
the traditional rights and freedoms of the peoples of Europe have been systematically swept away with a ruthless efficiency that would have been the envy of Napoleon and Hitler.
Your complaint will now be passed to the Commission with a view to it making a ruling under the Code. We would hope to be in touch with you with a decision within the next thirty five working days.
Thank you for your email yesterday in regard to your complaint against the Daily Star and Daily Express.
The PCC formally considers complaints about the vast majority of UK newspapers and magazines, provided that they subscribe to our funding body, the Press Standards Board of Finance (PressBof).
Owing to a funding dispute between Northern & Shell – the publishers of the newspapers – and PressBof, Northern & Shell do not currently subscribe to the system of self-regulation independently overseen by the PCC. As you correctly noted in your email, the Daily Star and Daily Express do not therefore fall under the Commission’s jurisdiction. I understand that you submitted your complaint prior to the withdrawal of the publishers’ subscription and the office informed you that the Commission would make a ruling on the complaint.
Unfortunately, the Commission did not reach a decision in regard to your complaint before Northern & Shell withdrew its subscription to PressBof and, now that the newspapers do not fall under the Commission’s jurisdiction, it is unable to do so. I understand that this must be frustrating for you, and I apologise that the Commission did not reach a decision while the newspapers still fell under its jurisdiction.
In the circumstances, you may wish to complain directly to the publications. If you wish to do so, their contact details are as follows:
Daily Express
The Northern & Shell Building, 10 Lower Thames Street, London EC3R 6EN
Switchboard Tel: 020 8612 7000 / News Desk Tel: 020 7098 2982
news.desk@express.co.uk
expressletters@express.co.uk
www.express.co.uk
Editor: Peter Hill
Daily Star
The Northern & Shell Building, 10 Lower Thames Street, London EC3R 6EN
Switchboard Tel: 0208 612 7000 / News Desk: 0208 612 7373
news@dailystar.co.uk
starletters@dailystar.co.uk
www.dailystar.co.uk
Editor: Dawn Neesom
You may also wish to consult a solicitor on the matter. If you would like the PCC to forward your complaint directly to the publication, please let us know.
I am sorry that we are unable to assist you further. Do contact us if you have any queries.
Further to an article about the murder of Edmond Safra, we wish to make it clear there was no intention to suggest that Mr Safra's widow Lily was involved in his death. We accept that there is no basis for such a suggestion and apologise for any distress caused.
In legal papers filed with the High Court by her London lawyers Mishcon de Reya, Safra says the story claimed there were reasonable grounds to suspect she was involved in the murder of her late husband, banker Edmond Safra.
Safra is seeking aggravated damages from Associated Newspapers claiming the article included two misleading headlines, with a photograph designed to put her at the very centre of allegations over the “unsolved” murder of her husband.
She is also seeking an injunction banning repetition of the allegations at the heart of her legal claim.
Safra argues the paper knew the story was false and that it was strikingly similar to a Mail on Sunday story for which she received an apology.
In addition, she says, the Daily Mail treated her complaint about the article contemptuously, failed to publish an apology or remove its online version of the story.
March 2008: £550,000 to the McCanns for "utterly false and defamatory" stories published in all four EN titles about the disappearance of their daughter, Madeleine.
April 2008: substantial undisclosed damages plus costs to Italian footballer Marco Materazzi after the Star falsely alleged he had used racist abuse to provoke an attack by France's Zinedine Zidane.
June 2008: substantial undisclosed damages to Ozzy Osbourne for false allegations by the Star about his behaviour at an awards ceremony.
July 2008: £200,000 to Robert Murat for false allegations about him by all EN titles during the hunt for Madeleine. (Three other newspaper groups also paid £200,000 apiece).
July 2008: substantial undisclosed damages plus costs to footballer Andy Cole because the Star falsely accused him of beating his wife.
October 2008: £375,000 to the so-called "tapas seven", friends of the McCanns, for false allegations about them after the disappearance of Madeleine.
December 2008: £45,000 plus costs to Inayat Bunglawala of the Muslim Council of Great Britain for false claims in the Express linking him to death threats against Prince Harry.
December 2008: damages to Matt Lucas and David Walliams for an article in the Daily Star Sunday that claimed their TV series had offended gay groups in the US. In fact, the named groups did not even exist.
January 2009: substantial undisclosed damages to teenager Kelly Marshall because the Star falsely claimed she had called a murderer a hero.
February 2009: substantial undisclosed damages to Pentagon Capital Management for false allegations in the Sunday Express about the fund manager's bosses.
June 2009: substantial undisclosed damages plus costs to footballer Michael Owen for claims in the Express that he was unwanted and about to retire.
June 2009: substantial undisclosed damages plus costs to David Beckham over false claims in the Star that he chatted up a topless model.
July 2009: £20,000 plus costs to Kate Beckinsale for false claims in the Express that she had been passed over for a movie role.
October 2009: undisclosed damages to Sheryl Gascoigne for a "sensational and highly offensive" story claiming her financial demands had caused her former husband, Paul, to relapse into alcoholism.
December 2009: substantial damages plus costs to Earl Spencer and his daughter for false allegations in the Sunday Express that they had acted improperly over his divorce from his second wife, Caroline.
January 2010: substantial damages and costs to Peaches Geldof for a Star story that falsely implied she was a prostitute.
April 2010: substantial damages to four trustees of a UK charity, Ummah Welfare Trust, after the Express falsely claimed it had links to al-Qaeda.
May 2010: substantial damages and costs to comedian Matt Lucas for a string of "grossly intrusive articles" in the Star following the death of his former partner.
July 2010: damages and costs to Susan Boyle for a Star story wrongly alleging she had to be sedated on a flight to Tokyo.
July 2010: £60,000 to the trustees of a charity, Interpal, for an Express story falsely claiming it supported Hamas.
July 2010: undisclosed damages to actor Mohammed George for an untrue Daily Star Sunday story accusing him of being drunk and threatening BBC staff.
October 2010: undisclosed damages to Rockstar Games for an "entirely false" Star story about the company having invented a video game based on the exploits of the gunman Raoul Moat.
November 2010: undisclosed damages and costs to former MP Stephen Hesford for a false Express report that he had sexually harassed an employee.
PressBoF's move follows a decision by the publisher - the second occasion on which this has happened since 2008 - that it no longer wishes to pay the voluntary industry levy to support the work of the PCC. Every effort was made by the PressBoF Board to reverse that decision before Northern & Shell's membership of the system lapsed on 31st December 2010.
This decision means that the Northern & Shell titles will now automatically cease to be covered by the work of the PCC, which will as a result of the publisher's decision no longer deal with complaints from members of the public about them, or of the Editors' Code Committee.
The Commission will continue to assist individuals to frame their complaints about published articles and will direct individuals to the relevant departments of the titles within the Northern & Shell group.
If Desmond's editors choose to ignore complaints altogether, nothing can be done for the complainant.
Richard Desmond has finally had enough of the frequency with which the paper is referred to the PCC.
I understand that the Northern & Shell letter offered no explanation for the decision to stop funding Pressbof, merely stating that it no longer suited Desmond's business needs.
Whether this means that his opposition is due to the number of complaints to the PCC about his papers' ethical lapses or whether it is simply about money is unclear.
Self-regulation becomes self-selecting regulation
John Whittingdale, chairman of the Commons culture, media and sport select committee, said: "I regard the exclusion as a very serious development. The committee is on record as saying that if self-regulation is to have any credibility it must encompass all the major publishers. This now creates doubt about its efficacy."
He noted that Desmond's exclusion does "carry some consequences" (as outlined above). Another committee member, Paul Farrelly, agreed. He thought Express Newspapers might find judges in libel and privacy cases more hostile towards papers that are not regulated by the PCC.
However, he also said that the exclusion illustrated that publishers lacked effective sanctions against one of their number willing to thumb their nose at self-regulation, adding that it further exposed the PCC as being "ineffective and toothless."
'Ultimately if major newspapers say “There’s no point in this system anymore, we’re not going to bother with it” eventually it will start to fall apart and in that scenario there will have to be something else.'
Self regulation works because the newspaper and magazine publishing industry is committed to it.
He is a rogue owner running rogue newspapers.
Hosting this bright new daily magazine show, Daily Express columnist Vanessa Feltz promises to draw on all her life experience.
She’ll be joined each morning by a prominent guest to talk through the topics of the day, while her partner Ben Ofoedu will be on hand as the programme’s roving showbiz reporter.
Vanessa Feltz’s new Channel 5 show has already proved a triumph – for her fiancé.
Within minutes of coming off air yesterday, co-host and musician Ben Ofoedu, 38, got a call from Warner Music wanting to sign him up.
The Phats and Small star, who has been engaged to Vanessa, 48, for four years, said: “What a fantastic day!”
A lesson in presenting was provided by the queen of morning television, Vanessa Feltz, who’s back like a breath of fresh air and a most welcome addition to the daytime schedules she is.
From the second the opening credits faded in the first edition of The Vanessa Show (Channel 5) she showed why she’s been so missed from our TV screens.
Seeing Daily Express columnist Vanessa in action it’s easy to forget she’s in a television studio and not just chatting away in your front room. It’s a precious gift for any presenter to possess.
The first of her daily weekday guests got things off to a bright and breezy start, as it was former Pussycat Doll Kimberly Wyatt, who revealed she’s such a supple dancer she can stick her toe in her ear!
Vanessa was joined on the new show by her co-host and fiancé Ben Ofoedu, the chemistry between the pair evident for all to see. He hosted another fun item called Reasons To Be Cheerful. Vanessa’s TV appearance is certainly cause for cheer in a gloomy January.
Did you catch The Vanessa Show on Channel 5 at 11am? It's a frothy confection of celebrities, gossip and fun every weekday morning...
On 8 August 2010 we published an article about a charity event held in aid of the Children's Heart Unit at the Freeman Hospital. We said that Denise Welch gave an interview to us about personal issues concerning her marriage to Tim Healy.
We accept that she did not say those things to us and we apologise to both of them for what was published.
A psychic has told police she sketched Jo Yeates’s killers only days before the murder.
Carol Everett says she saw the pair in a premonition she had about the landscape architect’s death.
The psychic investigator insists she “saw” Jo being attacked by two of a group of five men after she rejected their offer of a lift.
She said she did not realise the significance of her vision until Jo’s body was found three weeks later.
Carol, who claims her drawings have helped police in 20 previous cases, came forward after officers arrested Jo’s landlord Chris Jefferies, because she was certain detectives had got the wrong man.
The psychic – who handed police drawings of Soham double child killer Ian Huntley before his 2002 arrest, and claims she drew Washington sniper John Allen Muhammed – said she sketched Jo’s killing on December 7, 10 days before she vanished. “I just knew there was going to be something with this drawing,’’ she said. “I had a feeling about it.
ultimately this kind of unfounded speculation from a single source who has no knowledge of the case can't be helpful, particularly when she's allowed to toss out potentially serious misinformation like this
She claimed to have drawn Huntley and Maxine Carr before they were arrested, a claim which seems impressive at first but falls apart when you scroll down to the untouched image, which has 'Carr' with beyond-shoulder-length hair, and an utterly generic white male drawing which claims Huntley has blue eyes (he doesn't)...and isn't even sure whether the thing on his head is hair or a scarf.
I can’t imagine how this must make Joanna Yeates’ family feel. To have a national newspaper exploiting her death by printing pathetic, desperate, unfounded claims from a publicity-seeking fraud (or ‘psychic’) under a headline promising some sort of hope.
The Daily Star. Because sometimes losing your daughter just doesn’t hurt enough.
...viewers will be left baffled...the beautifully nuanced portrait of pre-First World War upper-class life could prove just a little too complex for the transatlantic audience...in the land of the notoriously short attention span.So the running time has been 'slashed' by two hours? Yet later in the article, Hastings says that Rebecca Eaton, an executive producer for the PBS network (which is broadcasting the series):
As a result, Downton, which ran for eight hours on ITV, has been slashed to six for the States.
insisted that any changes were minor and did not affect the quality of the programme.
To put it bluntly: it's simply not true.
While I would be incensed about the article to begin with--given that Hastings took up my time on vacation, interrupted me incessantly while I was answering his questions, refused to listen to me, clearly had an agenda of his own, and then had the temerity to quote my review without proper attribution--I'm most angry about the fact that I actually did the math for Hastings during the interview, demonstrating in no uncertain terms that there weren't two hours missing from the US broadcast of the series.
The only thing missing here are, in fact, the commercials themselves...
Let's take a closer look. PBS is airing Downton Abbey as four 90-minute episodes, bringing it to a run-time of roughly 6 hours. Removing the ad breaks, ITV's run of Downton Abbey ran for--wait for it--roughly six hours. (Two episodes ran as 60 minute installments, while five ran for 45 minutes excluding the commercials)...
The numbers that Hastings was using to make his case about widespread cuts failed to take into account the commercials, which don't air on PBS, even though he himself admits this in his piece.
PBS also believes its audiences will need an American to outline the key themes of the show. So before the first episode, actress Laura Linney will explain the inheritance principle.
First, Masterpiece's hosts typically do explore the historical and social contexts for the series...Nothing new there as Linney is performing the same role that all of Masterpiece's hosts ably step into before each episode of a program.
Second, Linney might be American but her fellow hosts--among them, past and present, David Tennant, Alan Cumming, Matthew Goode, etc.--are not. So I'm not sure what to make of the "Americans need Americans to explain things to them" comment, which just comes across as ill-informed and mean-spirited.
Now is a time full of speculation and implication, of innuendo and finger-pointing; you might hope that the established media could demonstrate more restraint and subtlety than the blogosphere, proving their journalistic credentials and why they should be trusted news sources, but what we are left with from many sources is a trail of smearing and sneering.
The presumption of innocence is a vital part of the British justice system and is something that certain newspapers claim to hold dear, and rightly so. Yet almost all of them, from the Daily Mail and The Sun to the Daily Mirror and the Telegraph, have treated him as if he were guilty.
Further to our article about increased security at Coronation Street's studios for their live 50th anniversary episode (December 9), we would like to make clear that while cast and crew were subject to full body searches, there was no specific threat from Al-Qaeda as we reported. We apologise for the misunderstanding and are happy to set the record straight.
