Hi, Ankita

This is yet another time when I feel that your editing has ended up making the news even worse.

The lead in this news from Rahul was edited for one issue, but you ended up leaving out a crucial fact — which Rahul had duly provided, mind you — that was required for the readers’ understanding.

http://themoneytimes.com/featured/20110711/cameron-under-pressure-delay-news-corp-bskyb-deal-id-101701710742.html

This is what Rahul had written:

News Corp.’s troubles don’t seem like ending since allegations that its top selling weekly newspaper allegedly supported the voicemail-hacking of a 13-year-old kidnapped girl Milly Dowler.

Amid all the contentions, political pressure is escalating on British Prime Minister David Cameron to delay the approval of News Corp’s acquisition of British Sky Broadcasting Group PLC until Dowler’s phone-hacking case is solved by the British police.

Ed Miliband, the leader of opposition is reportedly seeking parliamentary vote this week if Cameron fails to handle the issue.

This is what you changed the whole part to:

News Corp.’s troubles don’t seem to be ending any time soon.

After the allegations that its top selling weekly newspaper supported the voicemail-hacking of a 13-year-old kidnapped girl Milly Dowler in 2002, Ed Miliband, the leader of opposition, is reportedly seeking parliamentary vote this week if British Prime Minister David Cameron fails to handle the issue.

Meanwhile, News Corp. has terminated its best-selling Sunday tabloid ‘News of the World’, which was the nucleus of the phone-hacking allegations. Its last edition came out Sunday.

We needed to tell the readers what was Miliband seeking parliamentary permission on — which Rahul had duly provided but you omitted. This fact comes way down in your edit, but by the time the reader gets there, the damage will have been done. Till then, the reader will stay confused about which issue does the PM fail to handle. Rather than leading the reader through to the meaning, we have confused him in the beginning itself by withholding one crucial bit of information.

To reiterate, this is the crucial part that was omitted by you, to the detriment of the piece’s readability:

…political pressure is escalating on British Prime Minister David Cameron to delay the approval of News Corp’s acquisition of British Sky Broadcasting Group PLC until Dowler’s phone-hacking case is solved by the British police.

The issue before PM is the delaying of the News Corp’s acquisition of another company. But your edit appears to give the mistaken impression that PM has to deal with the girl’s voicemail hacking. Will the lofty British PM handle a small-time hacking issue?

Though Rahul’s lead was reading awkward, and sure needed an edit, we ended up making it worse. In future, kindly edit closely for clarity.

I have put it all in writing, rather than talking to you in person, so that you can closely review where you went wrong. We’ll discuss this once you have time for this.