India Uncut
This blog has moved to its own domain. Please visit IndiaUncut.com for the all-new India
Uncut and bookmark it. The new site has much more content and some new sections, and you can read about them here and here. You can subscribe to full RSS feeds of all the sections from here.
This blogspot site will no longer be updated, except in case of emergencies, if the main site suffers a prolonged outage. Thanks - Amit.
Saturday, March 26, 2005
Hey, I didn't write that
I have praised the Guardian's editing in the past, and accepted minor lapses because, well, shit happens in the relentlessly hurried environment of a newspaper desk. So when cliches have been inserted or the best portions of the writing cut, I've taken it in my stride. But what they've done to my latest piece is quite shocking.
Read my report of yesterday's play here. You will notice a line in the first paragraph that says that Younis Khan's innings comprised "more than 11 hours of diligent scratching". Well, firstly, I did not write that line; secondly, it couldn't be more untrue. Younis's innings was one of the most fluent I've seen, and only someone who didn't watch the game, or doesn't understand cricket, could call it "scratching".
The start and end of the piece is chopped rather badly, but all of that I can accept. But not the insertion of untruths in my copy. People will now read that piece and think what a bad writer this Amit Varma must be, and how poor his knowledge of the game.
Update: A birdie in the know tells me that the senior Guardian guys often don't do much editing on Fridays, for the Saturday paper, and it is likely to be some junior sub who made this mistake. I'm quite inclined to believe that, as the editing of my pieces has been good before this. You can't judge an organisation by what some trainee down the line does in a careless moment, unless it happens too often.
Read my report of yesterday's play here. You will notice a line in the first paragraph that says that Younis Khan's innings comprised "more than 11 hours of diligent scratching". Well, firstly, I did not write that line; secondly, it couldn't be more untrue. Younis's innings was one of the most fluent I've seen, and only someone who didn't watch the game, or doesn't understand cricket, could call it "scratching".
The start and end of the piece is chopped rather badly, but all of that I can accept. But not the insertion of untruths in my copy. People will now read that piece and think what a bad writer this Amit Varma must be, and how poor his knowledge of the game.
Update: A birdie in the know tells me that the senior Guardian guys often don't do much editing on Fridays, for the Saturday paper, and it is likely to be some junior sub who made this mistake. I'm quite inclined to believe that, as the editing of my pieces has been good before this. You can't judge an organisation by what some trainee down the line does in a careless moment, unless it happens too often.
