Apart from complaints, pictures also draw the greatest level of favourable comment, writes Mary O'Brien. A happy, sunny picture of a child, flowers or animals always prompts a number of readers take the trouble to phone or write to say how much they appreciate it, with some making the point that it's about time we acknowledged that most people lead normal, happy lives and they enjoy seeing their reality reflected in the newspaper.
I've been looking through the files of complaints this office received during the past 10 years and have come to the conclusion that there is nothing new under the sun. In the early 1990s, people were exercised by exactly the same topics that aggravate them today.
Then, as now, we stood accused of being pro and anti every political party in the country. At various times, some of you told us that the newspaper was anti-Irish, anti-British, anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish, anti-Palestinian, anti-American and anti just about every party to almost every war, dispute, election and referendum we covered during the period.
Lack of coverage is also a recurring theme. Political parties continue to complain when their statements are not published; competitors (or more often their parents) are still annoyed when results don't make it into print; and organisers of events - summer schools, college conferrings, concerts, local outings - are among those who call the office.
Lack of respect, sensitivity and taste are also common topics.
Referring to women by their surnames is a source of annoyance to some, as is the omission of titles from headlines that concern the Catholic hierarchy. Interestingly, the people directly concerned very rarely contact us. Most who complain say they imagine (some even say they are sure) the people involved would be upset.
In suggesting that this may not always be the case, I cite the example of certain cartoons and caricatures that were described as "offensive", "tasteless", "insensitive", "disrespectful". The very people who were lampooned inquired if they could buy the originals.
Almost the full range of "isms" are covered in the list of complaints. Accusations of sexism follow from the publication of photos of half-naked female models at fashion shows and female tennis-players' backsides at Wimbledon; describing someone as "old" is considered by some to be ageism; reports which include the ethnic origin of the subjects are deemed to be racist; and voyeurism is sometimes said to be our motive in publishing pictures of people in tragic circumstances.
But the area that draws the most comment is pictures. In reacting to some of the more gruesome images, some readers have commented on the truth of the Chinese saying that one picture is worth ten thousand words, while others believe they should not be published at all as they serve only to inure readers to violence and tragedy. The picture that elicited the greatest number of calls on any subject in the past 10 years, last year's poignant image of a child's trainers on a beach, taken after the child had tragically drowned, was considered by some of you to be too upsetting and you told us we shouldn't have published it.
Illiteracy in all its forms continues to provide grounds for complaints. Ten years ago, callers were saying how worried they were at the drop in standards of English. This year, they are saying the same thing. Bad grammar, misspelling, misuse of words and the use of the "grocer's apostrophe" are constant sources of irritation. Some find it difficult to accept that, in most cases, it is not ignorance but rather pressure of time that results in sub-editors taking their eye off the ball and readers remain baffled as to how we can publish such obvious mistakes as: the "youngest" of two; from "contraception" to death; let "their" be no more killing. Five years ago, one reader felt so strongly that he sent in over 100 examples of bad English that he found in The Irish Times during one 12-month period.
Despite having the impression that corrections have increased, I found that the number has not varied much from year to year, nor has the type of error altered significantly: names are misspelt; titles are wrong; the wrong picture or caption appears; dates and times of events cause confusion; and numbers continue to be the bugbear of some journalists. When I approached a reporter a few years ago about his novel method of working out percentages, he told me that if he had been any good at maths, he "would have found a proper job". Sub-editors are urged to double-check every calculation in news or feature stories.
In spite of sometimes being intensely irritated by mistakes or aggravated by opposing views, only a small number of callers are rude and abusive. The vast majority are friendly and courteous. They accept that opinions differ and that, no matter how much care is taken, mistakes will happen and that journalists themselves are unhappy when they get it wrong. Thank you for taking the trouble to contact us. It's been a pleasure to talk to you - most of the time.