Posts Tagged ‘economist’

Not a Muslim, but he makes fun of them*

In “Two mullahs went into a bar…” (November 26th) we cited Omid Djalili as a British Muslim comedian. He jokes about, among others, Muslims but is himself a Bahai. Sorry. Link *Correction December 2, 2011: The orignal version of this post’s headline mistakenly used the word “be” instead of “but”. (“Not a Muslim, be he [...]

Imaginary vote

In our issue dated November 5th we said that the UN General Assembly had voted to admit Palestine as a full member of UNESCO, when in fact the General Assembly did not conduct any vote regarding Palestine’s membership of the cultural agency. Sorry. Link  Report an error

Fuzzy numbers etc.

In our article on Europe’s bail-out plan (“No big bazooka”, October 29th 2011) we incorrectly said that Greece’s partners would have to lend €100 billion more than the €109 billion they promised in July. In fact they plan to lend €130 billion in total. Sorry. Link  Report an error

Well, look at who’s got a red face now

In our “Parable of Detroit” (October 22nd), we were a little unfair to note that there were “an awful lot of white faces” at Tech Town. The business accelerator points out that 65% of its new clients this year are from minorities, and that it has recently set up a fund for women- and minority-owned [...]

The Economist is sorry times two

IN OUR briefing last week on women and the Arab awakening (“Now is the time”), we said that Rachid Ghannouchi, the leader of Tunisia’s Nahda party, opposes the country’s liberal code of individual rights, the Code of Personal Status, and its prohibition of polygamy. We also said that he has threatened to hang a prominent [...]

All wrong

The pictured robot in our May 7th story on robots being used to deal with Japan’s nuclear disaster (“NukeBots”) was neither used in Japan nor a PackBot, as claimed in the caption. Our apologies. Link  Report an error

India, Pakistan… whatever

The table in "War's overlooked victims" (January 13th) mistakenly blamed the Indian army, rather than Pakistani forces, for 200,000 rapes in 1971. We apologise. Link  Report an error

A disconcerting trend

Schumpeter last week poked fun at a firm called "Trendwatchers" ("The status seekers", December 4th). The firm's real name is trendwatching.com. We're sorry. We hope this isn't the start of a new trend of incompetence on our part. Link  Report an error

The injustice of washroom lineups will continue

Our article on sexual equality and toilet provision (“Flushing away unfairness,” July 10th) reported that a ruling under human-rights legislation in New Zealand had ensured that women need wait no more than three minutes to use a public lavatory. This is incorrect. Sorry. Link  Report an error

Fuzzy numbers etc.

In our story on Brazil’s economy (“Joining in the carnival spirit, February 13th), we quoted economists at Itaú, a bank, as arguing that the government would have to strip out 496 billion reais, or half its total discretionary spending, to meet its fiscal-surplus target. In fact they said 49 billion reais and a quarter of [...]

Regret the links

In case you hadn’t noticed, I recently added a “What I’m Reading” sidebar to the site. It’s over there to the right. I link to relevant articles that I find interesting or of note. And now, every once in a while, I’ll post a round-up of some of those links to make sure you don’t [...]

Genital, not genetic

In our review of “Ruined”, Lynn Nottage’s play, “Political charge” (May 23rd), the phrase “violent genital mutilation” was written as “violent genetic mutilation”. Our apologies.  Report an error

Sorry, doctors

We would like to apologise to the world’s pathologists for suggesting that the histological examination of excised tumours is carried out by “technicians”, as suggested last week in “Illuminating surgery”. The pathologists who perform this work are, of course, physicians who specialise in the examination of tissue samples. Link  Report an error

Undented, not unrented

In last week’s article on South Africa (“Politics v the law”, April 4th) there was a typographical error in the penultimate sentence, in which an opinion poll is said to have found that “Jacob Zuma’s popularity is unrented, at least among blacks, who still seem to support him overwhelmingly.” “Unrented” should have been “undented”. Sorry [...]

Henry Kravis didn’t buy a $28 million armchair

Our report on the Yves Saint Laurent sale, “Caveat venditor” (March 7th), suggested that Henry and Marie-Josée Kravis may have been the purchasers of an early 20th-century chair designed by Eileen Gray. Mr Kravis assures us that neither he nor anyone in his family bought the chair in question. Our apologies to all concerned. Link [...]

Evicted by the press

Due to an editing error, our article on Cambodia last week incorrectly suggested that 4,500 residents near Boeung Kak lake in Phnom Penh had been evicted. This has not happened yet. Our apologies. Link  Report an error

Hey, that’s our bull

On the cover-wrap of our November 8th issue we used an image of a bull with a broken horn to advertise our special report on Spain. Grupo Osborne has asked us to clarify that they own trademark rights in the bull (with horn intact), and that no reference to the group was intended. Link  Report [...]

A conflict of interest

An article in the issue dated October 18th (“Treatment on a plate”) described a nutritional approach to the treatment of drug addiction. Part of the article was reported from a conference, one of whose organisers is a nutritionist with a commercial interest in the relationship between diet and brain function. It has been drawn to [...]

Pantheon, not Parthenon

Our review last week of the British Museum’s new exhibition, “Hadrian: Empire and Conflict”, mistakenly reported that the Roman emperor Hadrian commissioned the Parthenon. It is, of course, the Pantheon that is Hadrian’s most famous monument. Our thanks to the 46 readers who have written in to point this out, and our apologies for the [...]

Rush and Noel, together at last

In our review of John Bolton’s memoir, “Surrender is Not an Option”, we referred to Rush Limbaugh as a television talk-show host. He is, of course, best known for his radio show. In the same issue a misattributed photograph led us to run a picture of Gertrude Lawrence with Ivor Novello instead of Noël Coward [...]

Plagiarism at the Economist

Our article on Ugandan guards working in Iraq, written for us by a freelance journalist in Uganda, was drawn substantially from an article published previously in Uganda’s Daily Monitor and written by David Herbert. We were, of course, unaware of this. We apologise to Mr Herbert, the Daily Monitor and our readers. Link This is [...]