Why did they say Steven Hawking wouldn't have survived in the UK?

[caligulathegod]

@GameHat

Hmm, interesting coincidence.

I just caught part of a physics documentary and they have video of Hawking lecturing or giving a presentation in the 1970s. I was surprised to see him (although in a wheelchair) speaking normally and having a decent degree of controlled movement with his arms. First time I realized his disease must have been progressive.

And it gets worse. He used to use a clicker in his hand to control his speaking computer but now I think he’s limited to twitching his cheek to communicate.

[doubled]

@The_Great_Philosopher

Loony and right wing, maybe, but for a major national newspaper which has won Pulitzer prizes to suggest something as idiotic as Stephen Hawking being American, and then to use it as a key example in one of its most important editorials of the year? Don’t editors lose their jobs over things like that?

Also, did the paper ever apologize or print a correction?

Yes, the online article now has a correction (see link in the OP), although it was worded to make it sound more like a “people misinterpreted us” rather than a “we screwed up”.
But that’s exactly my point – IBD is a major national paper, so I’m sure there must have been some fact checking on the article. I can’t help but believe the author must have meant something different than how it sounded. Something like “the UK changed its health care rules in 1992 (or whenever) and Hawking was lucky to be diagnosed before that”, maybe. Something that passed the fact-checking at least a little. I just can’t imagine what that other interpretation was.

[SciFiSam]

@doubled

Yes, the online article now has a correction (see link in the OP), although it was worded to make it sound more like a “people misinterpreted us” rather than a “we screwed up”.
But that’s exactly my point – IBD is a major national paper, so I’m sure there must have been some fact checking on the article. I can’t help but believe the author must have meant something different than how it sounded. Something like “the UK changed its health care rules in 1992 (or whenever) and Hawking was lucky to be diagnosed before that”, maybe. Something that passed the fact-checking at least a little. I just can’t imagine what that other interpretation was.

That wouldn’t have come close to passing fact-checking, either. They just got it wrong and they don’t care.