Putting words into the Prime Minister's mouth

The Blooper: The inform quoting Najib was
picked up by the Singapore media as well as the rest of the world

With friends similar to these ...No thanks to the little sloppy journalism, Najib Razak has been quoted to have pronounced something he never did. Something so despicable that scarcely the complete Malaysian blogosphere as well as social media berated him. The PM's Department issued the matter the really subsequent day to clear the PM's name.

The clarification: Najib never pronounced it

But someone motionless to downplay the paper's own mistake by not making such the big deal out of the clarification. A singular mainstay in the former broadsheet, even on Page 3, is easily overlooked.

What the singular mainstay looks like

So how does the newspaper bungle so badly when it involves the Prime Minister himself? we think we know what happened. The following would ha! ve been the expected sequence of things:

1. The PM's Office released Najib's debate to be delivered late that night in allege to the media. There's the "CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY" note attached to any duplicate of the debate in case the PM decides to have changes or not to read the debate at all, that has happened before. The idea of arising the debate in allege is to enable the newspapers to encounter the deadline, usually around midnight.
(Even if there wasn't the Check Against Delivery or "Embargo" notice, the editor would have reminded the contributor covering the eventuality that night to have sure to check opposite delivery. Even if the editor had unsuccessful to remind, each contributor covering the PM should be senior sufficient to know it as basic: customary operating procedure).

2. The senior contributor processed the debate into the news essay at the office before going to the eventuality that night, where the PM would broach the speech

3. Najib delivered the speech. However, whilst vetting the duplicate earlier, he had motionless to jump over the paragraph(s) about compelling bloggers to reveal their IDs. Obviously, he did not agree (with his speechwriter) that it was the good idea at all.

4. Reporter unsuccessful to check opposite delivery

5. Newspaper published the story

6. All hell pennyless loose the subsequent day

7. PM Department issued clarification

8. Editor(s) motionless to "bury" the construction in the single-column page essay that was missed by many the subsequent day

I say, with editors as well as journalists similar to these, the PM does not need Malaysiakini or Malaysian Chronicle to do him in!