Reply With QuoteAnd wouldn’t it be nice if the GS hi-beat GMT really did cost £2,600, but of course they have confused it with a completely different 9F quartz model.
The Times (appropriately…) has a section on travel watches today. It's online (subscription) and in print…
The separate “Luxx report” (sigh…) has a section on the 12 best luxury watches for summer, somehow including TAG, Hublot and Breitling among the Cartier, Van Cleef and Patek offerings.
Finally they have an another article all about Longines.
In all cases, the text is the usual uninformed twaddle, but the photos are nice.
And wouldn’t it be nice if the GS hi-beat GMT really did cost £2,600, but of course they have confused it with a completely different 9F quartz model.
How on earth does it go to print with such a glaring error?
Originally Posted by Itsguy
The only thing you can trust in the Times these days is the Cryptic Crossword.
It is amazing when you actually know the details about something, then read about it in the press. Most of the stuff they print is a load of cobblers!
Sent from my M2101K7BNY using Tapatalk
<chortle>
To catch it would requite a subeditor who knew their subject. Or any subeditor at all.
Yes, I've noticed this too when I've seen articles about something I knew about. It is alarming how they get the wrong end of the stick. It taught me to take everything in the media with a grain of salt.
It's not just general interest either. Detailed news and political events very often presented in a simplified way to support a narrative.
As they say....don't believe everything you read in the papers!
Sent from my M2101K7BNY using Tapatalk
Michael Crichton called it the Gell-Mann effect: “Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”
Thanks for that quote. Well observed by Michael Crichton.
But I am glad to see that some persons do learn from both personal experience and from history. Do not take as face value what one sees on tv, in the papers, on blogs, on Twitter, on FB, or anywhere else where. Not even watch forums! It's frustrating of course, but it's much like zero-trust security or coding.
P.S. And yes, I did cross-check the veracity of the quote attributed to Crichton. ;-)
Sometimes they just can’t be helped. My car was once featured on Fifth Gear where they inserted a totally incorrect section regarding the active spoiler and how to reset it. Even though I told them several times they shot it anyway because who cares? Nobody who watches it will know or care so why bother? Let’s fire a car from a cannon instead etc.
Posting Permissions
