NY Times Accidentally Publishes Watermelons on Mars
Jun 14, 2021 21:15:46 GMT
RichTBikkies likes this
Post by LFC on Jun 14, 2021 21:15:46 GMT
FFS, how did THIS get through?
The New York Times has accidentally published an article claiming that the presence of watermelons on Mars has been confirmed. The piece appeared on their site yesterday under the headline "Fields of Watermelons Found On Mars, Police Say", before being promptly removed.
Fortunately, several people were able to archive the article, so we can all learn about the first life discovered outside of Earth. The article went into surprisingly little detail about the confirmation of extraterrestrial life, but that probably reflects the disappointment we'd all feel if we finally made contact with an alien species and it's a melon. Imagine first contact and all they want to talk about is pips and their superiority to honeydew.
"The FBI declined to comment on reports of watermelons raining down, but confirmed that kiwis have been intercepted," the now-deleted article read. "This story is terribly boring."
The article, of course, was not a scoop. Unless the New York Times is already in the pocket of Big Martian Melon or under some kind of alien threat, we can probably take it at face value that it was published by mistake, as confirmed by a small update on the site.
“A mock article intended for a testing system was inadvertently published on this page earlier,” the page now reads.
Fortunately, several people were able to archive the article, so we can all learn about the first life discovered outside of Earth. The article went into surprisingly little detail about the confirmation of extraterrestrial life, but that probably reflects the disappointment we'd all feel if we finally made contact with an alien species and it's a melon. Imagine first contact and all they want to talk about is pips and their superiority to honeydew.
"The FBI declined to comment on reports of watermelons raining down, but confirmed that kiwis have been intercepted," the now-deleted article read. "This story is terribly boring."
The article, of course, was not a scoop. Unless the New York Times is already in the pocket of Big Martian Melon or under some kind of alien threat, we can probably take it at face value that it was published by mistake, as confirmed by a small update on the site.
“A mock article intended for a testing system was inadvertently published on this page earlier,” the page now reads.
