Originally Posted by
CharlieBrem
Yup. The "solo" was an error in sub-editing, which has been corrected.
Editing errors are a fact of journalistic life. But back in the day when
The Times still thought of itself as a newspaper of record, print and broadcast journalists were taught about the necessity of maintaining what was called a 'sceptical balance'. The better ones still do.
An old-time sub who was doing his job properly would either have spiked this story without a second thought on the basis that it was entirely lacking in any such thing or sent it back for a rewrite. In newsroom terms it's nothing more than a boil of a blatant puff piece.