Mediocre bathroom book | Kill Duck Before Serving: Red Faces at The New York Times: A Collection of the...

book: Kill Duck Before Serving: Red Faces at The New York Times: A Collection of the Newspaper's Most Interesting, ...

books:


	• Kill Duck Before Serving: Red Faces at The New York Times: A Collection of the Newspaper's Most Interesting, ... St. Martin's Griffin, 2002 - 256 pages view larger image
	for more information click here

Hubris leads to continued Red Faces @ Grand Old Lady

"Red Faces at The New York Times" is "[a] collection of the newspaper's most interesting, embarrassing[,] and off-beat corrections".
Some would say that this NYT publication is an amazing display of collective hubris, and they would be right. It is an amazing example of dangling pr[o]positions, which is something of which they would not be put.
Others would be amazed at the examples of NYT writers, and copyeditors, fact checkers, editors, et al, failing to get it correct in repeated tries, e.g. referring to Dickens' Xmas bird as a goose instead of a turkey. Which establishes beyond a doubt that, at Christmas, not all of the NYT turkeys are on the table. And these other observers would be most correct.
Which leads to this reviewer's glee at finding two uncorrected faux pas on the same page of this delightful source for Letterman's 10 Most lists. I refer to page 21, where in two successive paragraphs, Fermat's conjecture is displayed incorrectly.
Fermat's conjecture, not a theorem, concerned an equation: "x[superscript]n + y[superscript]n = z[superscript]n" which Fermat suggest would have no solution where x, y, and z are positive whole numbers and [superscript]n is a whole number [power] more than 2. Unfortunately, in this tome of contrition, the equation is given as "xn +yn = zn" [no superscript "n"] which of course has an unlimited number of solutions.

This book was also compiled prior to the wholesale invention and plagarism embroglio which terminated two arrogant editors.

Non tu scis, quom et alto puteo sursum ad summum escenderis, maximum periclum inde esse ab summo ne rursum cadas. [Plautus, Miles Gloriosus, 1150-1151]

for more information click here

Mediocre bathroom book

Occasionally humorous, often obtuse, frequently pointless, this correction collection is only good for one thing I can think of: To briefly take one's mind off one's business while in the necessary room. It's certainly not worth the $13.95 cover price, but for this one purposes it passes the time with an occasional chuckle. Odd premise for a book.

That's Fit to Print"
"All the News

On June 21, 1950, the front page slogan appeared like this. By the time the error was noticed, it was too late to correct it that day. But it was corrected, in a manner of speaking, the next day and every day thereafter.

Even Homer nods. Some mistakes are careless oversights while others are genuine howlers. This irresistible collection of notable errors from the pages of The New York Times includes everything from gross historical inaccuracies, glaring misidentifications, and disastrous recipes to a wide range of inexplicable, unsupportable boners. Kill Duck Before Serving is a quirky selection of all the corrections fit to print by one of our most esteemed newspapers.

March 11, 1975
In yesterday's issue, The New York Times did not report on riots in Milan and the subsequent murder of the lay religious reformer Erlembald. These events took place in 1075, the year given in the dateline under the nameplate on Page 1. The Times regrets both incidents.

April 7, 1995
Because of a transcription error, an article about Senator Alfonse M. D'Amato's remarks about Judge Lance A. Ito misquoted the Senator at one point. In his conversation with the radio host Don Imus, he said: "I mean, this is a disgrace. Judge Ito will be well known." He did not say, "Judge Ito with the wet nose."

October 22, 2000
An article about Ivana Trump and her spending habits misstated the number of bras she buys. It is two dozen black, two dozen beige and two dozen white, not two thousand of each.

July 14, 1985
A report misidentified the document on which John Hancock put his famous prominent signature. It was the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

for more information click here

reviews: page 1, 2