Newspaper Practice
268 candidates; 167 passed - 62 per cent

Moving the newspaper practice examination to the start of the day appears to have improved the number of passes.

A change, which is almost certainly due to candidates feeling fresher than at the traditional end of the day timing for this paper, has seen a significant and welcome drop in the number of silly, stupid and bizarre mistakes.

The poor standard of English, however, has been maintained. Too many try and impress markers when they should try to do just that or, better still, just do it.

On the question of examination technique, far too many candidates failed to answer the questions posed. Asked what they would do, many insisted on telling examiners "You could...".

Listing several options did not earn a pass mark without an indication of which the candidate would have chosen.

The number who used "their" instead of "there" suggested an over reliance on spell-checkers.

Agreement in the use of nouns, verbs and pronouns was all too rare.

"Seeking from the chairman of the company their view" was acceptable where it clearly related to the view of the company (as referring to its official policy) and the concurring view of the chairman (as an individual).

What was unacceptable was "phone my MP and get their comment". Should sloppy use of language be accepted in a professional wordsmiths'; examination, even if the material is not copy for general publication?

There has, sadly, been little evidence of improvement in the legal knowledge of the majority of candidates.

Almost every week Press Gazette tells us of the success of a court reporter in opposing the making of an unnecessary restrictive reporting order.

Most candidates were courageous enough to say they would challenge on the spot what they thought to be wrong.

The number of candidates who demonstrated how ill-prepared they were to meet such a challenge, however, suggests that there could be an alarming number of unreported cases of abysmal failure to oppose such orders.

Lord Bingham's extension of public meeting statutory qualified privilege to 'bona-fide'; press conferences was another area of law that appeared to merit more study and understanding.

Talking to a pensioner who slagged off yobs terrorising his neighbourhood hardly qualified as a press conference whatever interviewer and interviewee agreed to call it.

Another worry for editors is that so many candidates thought that answers to questions they posed to any press officer were legally official statements and would thus enjoy the protection of qualified privilege.

The practice of keeping this examination topical was continued with all questions being based on recent or current situations with which a senior reporter should be able to deal.

The increase in the percentage passing is welcome but when one in five candidates fails to reach even a borderline mark there is an all too obvious suggestion that some trainees are not getting the necessary on-the-job training and supervision.

Find out who passed their exams
PLUS