In its story yesterday, “The Real Face of Divorce,” the Times identified Mrs. Smith as the editor’s wife. She is actually the editor’s ex-wife. The Times regrets the error.
In its correction yesterday, the Times said that it regretted the error of identifying Mrs. Smith as the editor’s wife. In fact, the Times has had six months to use the correct label and is playing playing more mind games.
In its correction of two days ago, the Times identified Mrs. Smith as the editor’s ex-wife. Due to an printing error, the full description should have read, “the editor’s vengeful, home-wrecking, pool-boy-shagging ex-wife.”
The Times erred when it said that Mrs. Smith loved her husband. She in fact never loved her husband and only married him to get back at her mother.
Adding to the previous correction, Mrs. Smith was only married for her money.
The article, “The Real Face of Divorce,” identified the editor as a father of two. The story should have said he is only a father of one.
The Times would like to add that Mrs. Smith is a filthy, lying, no-good whore.
Following up on “The Real Face of Divorce,” Mrs. Smith clarifies that the editor must be color-blind, since he didn’t notice the second child’s red hair.
The Times confesses that the paper was a fool for believing Mrs. Smith would never sink so low, and that those walks on the beach or picnics in the park or the surprise trip to Aruba must not have meant anything to her.
Previously, Mrs. Smith was quoted as saying she did not love the editor. She now retracts that statement.
In the aforementioned story, the Times noted there was no hope of reconciliation. That prediction, while still possible, can no longer be labeled as a fact.
The Times omitted a quote from Mrs. Smith saying that in order for there to be any chance of reconciliation, there needs to be some major changes in the division of labor around the house, child rearing approaches, and mating habits. The Times regrets the omission.
The Times accepts the previous correction. The full story, “The Real Face of Divorce,” has been retracted and replaced with a new one, “The Happy Face of Marriage Counseling.”
The Times was also correct in stating that the editor has two children. The earlier correction was just lashing out.