Given the figures I found, it would have said something along the lines of, 'Less marked decline in corrections, therefore perhaps less bad than Daily Mail. etc. etc'.
Then came yesterday's corrections.
In one we are asked to believe that by reporting how a freelance worker supposed mentioned a willingness to work nude on her CV, that they didn't mean to give the impression this women was willing to work nude.
Then we are asked to believe that reporters 'forgot' to mention that the reporters won an iPad, and iPod Nano and some flowers on the website Yipiii.com rather than just a fishbowl as reported. (See Tabloid Watch for more)
Neither is credible, and it just goes to show that printing corrections is one thing, expressing sincere remorse that indicates lessons have been learnt is another.
But since I went to the trouble of totting up the figures, (again using this record of the corrections) and making the graphs, I may as well publish them.
Compared to the Mail, we can see not only that the decline is less steep, but also that there have been several weeks where the Sunday paper prints more corrections in a week than its Monday to Friday sister paper.
The only thing that stands out from the Mail on Sunday figures is that the weeks when no corrections are published have become a bit more frequent.
As I said about the Daily Mail, this could be because the paper is raising standards but, on the strength of what we saw yesterday, I have my doubts...