I have a deep antipathy to Murdoch press, having said that they used to have remarkably high editorial standards in the Australian flagship newspaper (called "The Australian") and when News Ltd went on a cost cutting drive, around the time of the collapse of their main competitor, Fairfax Ltd (caused by Warwick fairfax, who basically wrecked the empire: he now consults in the USA on .. how to be a successful entrepreneur!) It merged a huge amount of sub-editor functions into a JV with Fairfax, which subsequently basically failed in-place: They sacked the good staff, and kept an out-source agency which had no clue. The Oz, is now pretty U/S for basic grammar AND spelling.
They also routinely now do pun leads. This was funny for about half a second, ever. The Graun also does far too many pun leads. I think all newspapers wind up there.
A good fictional account of news headlines and the journalistic pressures of newspaper writing in happier days is in "leaven of malice" by Robertson Davies: a fictional Canadian newspaper, beset by a cruel trick played in "hatches, matches and dispatches" -"The Shipping News" has its moments too.
2. Can't they at least fix typos quickly?
3. I still regularly see trivial grammar errors (repeated words, etc) in opinion pieces on the Guardian, not just breaking news and liveblogs. I guess some of those opinions pieces might be treated as "fast-turnaround journalism", AKA "hot takes". The rate of simple typos there makes me wonder about more important things like factual accuracy.
Edit to add: reading the article more closely, it sounds like they've only started using this new system quite recently, so hopefully it will help them improve. I stand by my opinion that in recent years the rate of typos and grammar errors has been higher on the Guardian than most other comparable news sites.
