Site menu:

Site search

Get Updates

Enter your email address to hear about new posts. (You can view my privacy policy here.)


RSS Recent Posts

Archives (month)


Friday fiascos

A couple of matters caught my attention this morning, from the world of journalism and coffee shops.

Part 1 … Friday the fifteenth

daily mailThe Daily Mail wants us to believe that an Iraqi bomber has been awarded £33,000 in damages for being unlawfully detained.

In fact, as we can see from the judgment, the damages for unlawful imprisonment amounted to just 10% of that figure – at the rate of £100 per day.

I wonder how the editor of the Daily Mail would feel if he, or someone close to him, were held unlawfully and received £100 per day in compensation.

The other £30,000 was for matters which most of us would consider to be torture.

Part 2 … Wayne’s World

Wayne's coffeeA Swedish coffee shop has launched in London under the not-very-Swedish sounding name of Wayne’s coffee. Their first branch is around the corner from me.

A substantial banner announced that, as part of their opening celebarations, there would be “50% of hot drinks”. Knowing how easily a typo can be missed when there are other things to worry about (50% off hot drinks, presumably?), I went in this morning and ordered my drink.

“I’m sorry”, the barista said, “our machine is broken. Would you like a cup of tea instead?”

So, not a typo after all. They really are serving only 50% of hot drinks today. But why advertise the fact?

[Update 1: The Daily Mail has subsequently published not one correction but two – presumably because the first correction was deemed not to go far enough – acknowledging that the portion of the damages relating to unlawful imprisonment was £3,300 and also that the claimant was not, in fact, involved in bomb-making.

Update 2: Wayne’s coffee tweeted an invitation to me to return to their coffee shop for a free drink and a piece of cake, both of which were delicious.]

Sign up for updates by Email, Twitter or RSS Feed.

See also:  Victim statements: are they having the wrong impact?

Related articles on this website
In 2012, when I clicked on a link in order to watch a family friend appear in front of the Leveson Inquiry, I little realised just how much the subject ...
Read the complete article
I’m not sure quite how to say this. So I’ll say it twice:Yesterday, a young graduate won her claim against the government’s back-to-work scheme. She argued that the regulations and ...
Read the complete article
What are the chances of being able to write a 2,000 page report on press regulation and walk away with all-party support (or even all-Party support)? Plainly, not very high. ...
Read the complete article
Like many people, I have been following The Leveson Inquiry intermittently. As someone with a background in regulatory policy, I am particularly interested in the way that many witnesses have ...
Read the complete article
Much has been written about the Government’s appeal to the Supreme Court in the Brexit case. Political commentators tell us that the appeal is very likely to fail. Many lawyers ...
Read the complete article
The press are against statutory regulation of their activities. That is the message they have been sending to the Leveson Inquiry. But most people fear that, without a legislative underpinning, ...
Read the complete article
I was disappointed to read recently that the UK has dropped to 40th place in the World Press Freedom Index. Among the 39 countries which are said to offer the ...
Read the complete article
The European Court of Human Rights has decided today that police “kettling” of crowds – holding them within a police cordon for hours at a time – does not deprive ...
Read the complete article
A pressing need for regulation …
Journalists in a tiz at Supreme Court’s win-win decision
Leveson – Is the battle already lost?
Leveson and the Living Trees
Brexit: supreme logic required
Leveson could legislate for a non-statutory regulator
Reporters Sans Frontieres: not my idea of a knock out
Court takes a liberty with our freedom