I’d like to thank a faithful reader from Missouri for setting me straight on an article we published in our December issue. On page 24, the headline reads “The Future of Farming: Industry leaders have a no-holes barred discussion on agriculture’s major challenges, and what farmers and corporations need to do to feed the coming groundswell of people.”
In a voicemail message, the reader says:
“I read your article on the future of farming and found it to be a very interesting. Harry Stine is probably, in my opinion, the smartest of the whole bunch. I enjoyed what he had to say and others, too. But the main reason I called is that ‘somebody needed tell the emperor that he didn't have any clothes on.’ Well, I figure nobody else is going to tell you, so I decided I’d call and leave a message. Your headline says, ‘Industrial leaders have a no holes barred discussion.’ I hate to tell you this, but that is no “holds barred,” not “holes” barred. That’s the way the old saying goes.”
Sure enough. I quickly did a search and found out “holds” is a wrestling term that has been used since the 1940s to describe holds that are illegal, or barred.
I wasn’t able to change the print headline, but you can find the corrected version here.
Thanks for the correction, and, as always, for reading.