There are many kinds of editors out there and depending on the profit level of the individual news source there is a really fantastic chance that the person doing the job is extremely unqualified for the job or they don't really care. I was an editor for my college newspaper but I never pursued an actual career in journalism because I realized upon attempting to get involved that the entire industry is driven by nepotism and I suppose that is similar to really any other industry as well.
Newspapers in their paper form barely exist anymore and the competition for the few jobs that remain is extremely tough. I feel as though I was pretty good at my job but I don't have the connections necessary to make a real wage at this so I am glad things panned out for me the way that they did.
Like any other industry, some of the people that get handed the jobs by a friend or relative are actually really bad at their jobs and sometimes this shines through to the end product. It happens more frequently at lower-tier news sources because generally speaking there is only one editor and the journalists that work for said news source, for the most part, aren't even aware of the actual paper layout until it is published. Therefore, when there are terrible errors about the layout it can normally be blamed on the editor who likely keeps their job because they are connected.
Here are some funny ones that probably were horrifying to the people that were subjected to it.
The couple in the picture were just enjoying a beer at the botanical gardens and were probably thrilled they were going to be in the newspaper, until they saw it. They of course, have nothing to do with the story that appears directly below them but I would imagine that they will be referred to (jokingly) as sex offenders for their entire lives. If it was me, this would be framed in my house for sure.
This raised more questions than it answers because I didn't even know that Santa as a psychologist nor did I know he was connected to schools in any more than a colloquial manner. This would be another one for the highlight reel on how to edit incorrectly.
It stops being funny once it is the image of an actual child that is the subject of bad editing and I would imagine that a massive retraction and apology needed to be issued after this issue hit the streets.
It is difficult to know whether or not this was actually a mistake or not because the press in the U.K. frequently goes after the royal family in tabloids and what not. I would imagine if it was a serious publication that an extensive apology was issued because even if it was an accident, this is really bad form.
The thing that grinds my gears about all of these is the fact that the person in charge presumably is paid a wage to make a presentable product and mistakes like these, especially in easily noticeable headlines complete with pictures are pretty inexcusable. They could and should be easily and immediately notices by whoever is in charge and even at the low level newspaper that I worked at for free had proof copies that we went over as a team before we sent the finished product to the printing presses.
