The UK's Guardian Newspaper gets it in the neck for failing to research their published story on the deaf Juror they printed. Read the apology. The Guardian prides itself on being a disabled and deaf-friendly mouthpiece (The BBC did too and look what happened there!), but it really needs to check facts first, especially those it prints regularly on BSL usage and culture etc and its abysmal record of clarifying people with hearing loss.
The issue appears to be them sponsoring BSL and cultural deaf input and 'Jpiurnalism' without ensuring bias isn't represented for a media that promotes its awareness there does seem too many question marks on what it prints as 'fact'. There appear issues with who they ask regarding deaf and hearing loss items with non-signers being rarely represented.
It's not helped with ATR having to correct the spelling and grammar either.
Profoundly deaf jurors
Corrections and clarifications column editor
An article said Matthew Johnston “is believed to have established a legal landmark … by becoming the first profoundly deaf person to sit on a jury in a crown court in England and Wales”. The claim was based on Ministry of Justice records, but two readers have since contacted the Guardian to say they or a relative had served as profoundly deaf jurors (Lip-reading and subtitles allow a man to become the first deaf juror, 29 August, page 18).