Although I made it clear in my article Scattershot innuendo and muck that I was indifferent to the outcome of the arguments on the merits in Da Silva Moore, that is no excuse for substituting the word “Plaintiffs” for “Defendants” in the heading of an article whose entire purpose was to draw attention to the way in which one party is getting all the airtime in the commentary on the case.
Perhaps I was subconsciously proving my own point. Perhaps the most sensible conclusion is that 4.00am on a Saturday morning is not the best time to think up article headings.
I am not too bothered about being defensive on this, but if I were, I would observe that it has taken until today for a sharp-eyed reader to spot my error. The tenor of the article was clear enough.
Changing the titles of articles is a pain, because they go through into the page names, and correcting them fouls up the SEO and breaks third-party links. It seemed, nevertheless, the right thing to do on this occasion.
eDisclosure Information Project 