Helen (heleninwales) wrote,

  • Mood:

Possibly getting slightly obsessed?

Further to my last post about Lorna Page, mjlayman pointed out a thread on Making Light[*] about the same topic. That lead me to this Guardian article, which is more or less the same as the Mail and Telegraph ones.

However, this time I cracked and wrote to the email address given at the bottom of the article. Amazingly, I got a very swift and positive response which began, "Thank you for your email. I worried about this while reading the paper at home," and concluded (after noting that it wasn't possible to prove that Mrs Lorna Page had received no money at all):

"Since we cannot firmly establish the facts it is difficult to do a correction but I aim to do a clarification this weekend (though space is extremely tight). "

I feel better now. My faith in the Guardian has been restored :)

On the other hand, my opinion of the Daily Mail has slid downwards another notch. Sally Zigmund says here in the comments to Victoria Strauss's blog post, "The Daily Mail's report seems the most inaccurate. It's also odd that I posted a polite, but incredulous comment on their website but it hasn't appeared." Yes, well, it seems that although the Daily Mail has a comment feature at the bottom of articles, these are vetted and only ones supporting the article are ever posted. My daughter reported this same problem when she attempted to put the record straight regarding a derogatory article the Mail had published about a friend of hers. Just so you know.

And I'll let the matter rest there and get on with something more useful...

[*] I don't normally read Making Light, there are only so many hours in the day and I already spend too many of them online. :)
Tags: 93 year-old author, self-publishing

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 1 comment