Yahoo News screws up again

[matthewota]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081209/sc_afp/usspacenasaplanetscience

The planet shown in the photo orbits Fomalhaut.

The planet actually orbits the 7.7-magnitude type-K star HD 189733 in Vulpecula.

I have seen Yahoo News make too many astronomy goofs, which really hurts their credibility as a viable news source. How can I trust their reports on topics I am not as well versed in?

[NEOWatcher]

The planet shown in the photo orbits Fomalhaut.
Yes; and if you follow the image link, it does say that.

The planet actually orbits the 7.7-magnitude type-K star HD 189733 in Vulpecula.
That's the real goof. They never make a clear distinction about this one (or that it is a different one). They only refer to it as "a distant planet"


I have seen Yahoo News make too many astronomy goofs, which really hurts their credibility as a viable news source. How can I trust their reports on topics I am not as well versed in?
I think that applies across the board. This story is through a NASA spokesman, through AFP, and presented by Yahoo.
Every step along the way gets mis-interpreted, and every step probably thinks they got it right. Each step interprets certain words somewhat differently. The old telephone game. Nobody goes to the source for clarity (end result - bad reporting)

[SeanF]

That's the real goof. They never make a clear distinction about this one (or that it is a different one). They only refer to it as "a distant planet"
The article proper only ever refers to a single, specific planet. Since the caption to the picture says "the newly discovered planet," it does imply it's the same one referred to in the story.

Clicking on the image gives you not only a larger size, but also a more complete caption. In that case, you are told that the planet in the image and the planet on which CO2 was discovered are different planets (although it would seem to belong to a different article). But from the article and the abbreviated caption, they appear to be the same planet.

[NEOWatcher]

Since the caption to the picture says "the newly discovered planet," it does imply it's the same one referred to in the story.
And to be clear if nobody caught it*, the wording is exactly the same, but the article caption truncated it in mid sentence which completely changed the meaning.
"the planet" is a bit different than "the planet, Formalhut B"

*yes, you said it, but it seems rather subtle to me.