We still can’t get over this correction to the New York Times’s Chris Grayling piece

Glad they cleared that up.


Sign Up

Get the New Statesman's Morning Call email.

Your mole usually likes to operate in a fast-paced, real-time news environment – but it just cannot get over this Journalism Incident that happened two days ago.

On 3 March, the New York Times ran a baffled profile of Chris Grayling, asking why the constantly failing minister was still in the cabinet.

And, on 3 March, it ran a correction to that piece.

Had it been unfair on Grayling? Printed some inaccurate accusations? Failed to fairly represent the man’s integrity? Salaciously hammed up his incompetence?

Well, no.

Actually, it had wildly underestimated exactly how shit the Transport Secretary actually is. By quite a big margin.

Yes, the poor American editor assumed the minister had cost UK taxpayers £2.7m, not the actual figure cited by the Labour Party of… £2.7bn:

As to why the enthusiastic Brexiteer who ran Theresa May’s leadership campaign and has remained staunchly loyal ever since is still in the cabinet – your guess is as good as ours.

I'm a mole, innit.