From: Nigel Hanson 

24 February 2015              

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif

                                                                                                                                             

Dear Mr Berkley,

 

I refer to your complaint emails of 21 and 28 January, which the Editor has considered.

 

The ‘Millennium Development Goal’ framework of 2001 originated from General Assembly Resolution 55/2 of 2000, the ‘Millennium Declaration’.  Broadly, the MDGs were established by that Resolution, and the aims adopted in 2000 have become widely known simply as the MDGs.

 

Although it might be preferable to be more precise in certain circumstances, in many contexts there is no significant inaccuracy in referring more loosely to the aims adopted in 2000 as the MDGs.  This is a convenient and appropriate ‘shorthand’ with which to summarise the key information in the right context, and bring it to the attention of readers without undue complexity.

 

We consider you have raised unnecessarily pedantic points in relation to a number of our articles.  We are satisfied that the wording of the following five articles is unobjectionable: the mention of the MDGs in the context of these pieces does not create any significant inaccuracy or misleading impression:

 

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/df2c6ff0-8447-11e4-bae9-00144feabdc0.html
2 January 2015

http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2015/01/15/guest-post-2015-should-be-the-year-of-real-action-on-extreme-poverty-and-climate-change
15 January 2015

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/0e4cd3de-9bfd-11e4-b6cc-00144feabdc0.html
15 January 2015 

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/bbcd03f6-3a89-11e4-bd08-00144feabdc0.html
14 September 2014 

http://blogs.ft.com/mdg/2008/09/23/aid-is-a-leg-up-not-a-hand-out/
23 September 2008

In relation to the following four articles your points are also marginal, but having regard to the particular context we have nevertheless considered it appropriate to amend a few words, as shown below in bold, to ensure sufficient accuracy:


http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2014/08/21/the-new-un-development-goals-still-missing-the-point/
21 August 2014

 

‘…The MDG [DELETED:s] aims, adopted by UN members in 2000 with [DELETED: a baseline in 1990 anda target date of 2015, [DELETED: set] led to eight goals including reductions in extreme poverty and…'




http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d321500c-2e27-11e4-b760-00144feabdc0.html

27 August 2014

 

‘…The previous targets, which led to the Millennium Development Goals, were agreed in 2000 with objectives for 2015.’



http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/23232010-c5d9-11e3-a7d4-00144feabdc0.html
17 April 2014

 

‘…The eight MDGs adopted in [DELETED: 2000] 2001 didn’t mention disability, not even in the small print. ….’




http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2014/11/06/guest-post-the-un-needs-to-overhaul-its-development-vision/
Nov 06 2014 

 

‘…The conventional wisdom behind the renegotiation of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) – eight targets for reducing poverty and its attendant woes that[DELETED: were agreed by all] followed a resolution by United Nations members in 2000 – is that there were not enough of them…’



 

Yours sincerely

Nigel Hanson

 

-- 

Nigel Hanson

Senior Legal Counsel

Legal Department

 

Number One Southwark Bridge, London, SE1 9HL

 

 

 

 

 


This email was sent by a company owned by Pearson plc, registered office at 80 Strand, London WC2R 0RL.  Registered in England and Wales with company number 53723.