The NYT reports on a proud tradition in the Brit media -- one I wish that would be adopted here: A good April Fool's story.

An excerpt:

The article certainly looked normal, sitting innocently on the front page of The Guardian newspaper on Friday. Under the headline "New Labor Lines up Countryside Role for Charles," it reported that the Labor government wanted to enlist the Prince of Wales as its liaison to rural Britain, giving him "some hands-on experience of running something."

O.K., but does the government also want to make fox hunting legal again and make it more socially inclusive, to provide "kids on housing estates the same opportunity to hunt as posh children," as the article also reported? Does it want to rebrand Camilla Parker Bowles "as a jam maker rather than a home breaker"? And does the prince really employ a polling firm called "Yo, Guv!"?

Er, no. April Fool!

The fake April 1 article is a fine British newspaper tradition, befitting a country where the news media revel in not taking themselves too seriously.

Before we abandon this topic, let us remember the Globe and Mail newspaper had an excellent April Fool's story in 2001 -- with the exception that they were the fools.

CBC Radio's Michael Enright did an interview that Sunday morning with "Jimmy Carter," billed as a former U.S. president.

At one point, Enright called Carter a washed-up peanut farmer.

Carter shot back a remark about how didn't Enright used to be on five days per week?

Listening to this back-and-forth -- via shower radio, with the shower running -- was the Globe's Drew Fagan (now a senior bureaucrat with Foreign Affairs Canada).

He filed a story. It ran on the front page -- in the Monday, April 2 paper -- about how a CBC radio host insulted a former U.S. president.

Now, what is the key thing about a story that runs on April 2 when it is based on something that happened April 1?

Apparently Enright did let slip at the show's end that the interview was a hoax, but by then, the shower was apparently over.

While you chew on that, be advised that the hoodwinking of the Globe reached number 33 on the Museum of Hoaxes' top 100 April Fool's pranks of all time.

To add to the irony of the NYT story, the Globe at that time was being edited by a Brit: Richard Addis.

Addendum

Globeandmail.com columnist Mathew Ingram referred to this item in a Feb. 25, 2008 posting: Thoughts on new media and ethics