Patience severely tested by Guardian

I bow to no man in my love of The Guardian. Yet sometimes in its desire to do, and to be seen to be doing, the right thing, it can end up tying itself in exquisitely entertaining knots.

This week we’ve been treated to an impromptu mini-series, played out in the unlikely setting of the Guardian’s ‘Corrections and Clarifications’ section. This is where, every day, the Guardian takes great pains to set the record straight on any errors made in previous editions. A most praiseworthy concept in principle but sometimes – as happened this week – the media equivalent of continuing to dig when finding oneself in a deep hole.

Here is how this week’s delightful (unless your name happens to be Patience Wheatcroft, the newly-appointed editor-in-chief of Wall Street Journal Europe) sequence of events played out.

Guardian 16 November:

In a full page Media Guardian interview entitled 'It's very dangerous to go free', Patience Wheatcroft was described as...

‘A life-long supporter of the Conservative party, and married to a Tory councillor...’

Well that all seems pretty straightforward. But wait, what’s this...

Guardian 17 November - ‘Corrections and Clarifications’:

A piece about the new editor-in-chief of the Wall Street Journal Europe should have said that Patience Wheatcroft's husband was formerly married to a Conservative councillor – rather than currently ('It's very dangerous to go free', 16 November, page 5, Media).

Oh I see, they’re no longer actually married – what an embarrassing mistake. Bloody researchers. Oh well, at least Mr P has still got the Tory councillor gig to keep him occupied.

Hang about though, whatever now...

Guardian 17 November - ‘Corrections and Clarifications’:

A piece about Patience Wheatcroft, the new editor-in-chief of the Wall Street Journal Europe, should have said that her husband was formerly a Tory councillor – not currently. That is also what our correction in this column yesterday should have said, rather than portraying the marriage as a thing of the past. We were misinformed (17 November, page 30).

Right so let’s make sure I’ve got this right. Marriage on, Tory councillorship off. Okay think I’ve got it now.

To be fair, the only mildly disappointing aspect of what has been a thoroughly entertaining diversion that's had me gripped all week, was that uncharacteristically churlish ‘we were misinformed’ note on which the Guardian ended today’s installment. Surely it flies in the face of the whole mea culpa principle of ‘Corrections and Clarifications’ to then go and casually pass the buck.

Right time for a stiff drink and a good lie down before checking in for tomorrow’s developments.