Journalists - Ignorant, lazy or stupid?

[JimW]

The Times has three pages (tabloid version) of Silverstone comment today. Much of it is pretty routine (but not wrong). But why can't a supposedly reputable "Paper of Record" get basic facts nearly right?

There is a section called "Memorable moments at the circuit" which is under a Silverstone not British GP heading. It includes

1976: Stewards warded off a near riot by letting James Hunt restart in his McLaren after an accident on the first corner. Fans threw beer cans when word came that he may not get to start. When he did, he overtook Niki Lauda’s Ferrari at Druid’s Bend to win and go on to the world title. Two months later, a court disqualified him and gave the race to Lauda.

Now even a moderate anorak would know that this was at Brands Hatch. I only know because I was marshalling there and ducking beer cans. But it is hardly rocket science to be able to distinguish between a Grand Prix and races at Silverstone is it?

With apologies to any journalists reading this, it does bear out my view that, if you know about a subject, the best any piece of journalism will get is: Nearly right, Lord Copper

Regards

Jim