From Nigel Blower
The front cover of your 9 May issue flaunts the headline: “The mysterious monopole – predicted by theory, hunted for decades, found at last”. Exciting news, I thought, until I reached the cover story inside and found a very different description: “They are not exactly the monopoles of physics lore, but they could provide us with essential clues as to how those legendary beasts behave” (p 28).
Since the monopole was “found” on the front cover, but apparently lost again by page 28, my wife suggested I carefully check the intervening pages in case it was lurking there, but sadly there was no sign of it.
I understand that the front cover of a magazine needs to be attractive and to tempt the reader, but does New Scientist really need to exaggerate what its articles offer simply to compete with other magazines?
Cambridge, UK
