[Grammar] Incomprehensible sentence

[thienan123456]

Can anyone explain me what structure is used in this sentence? Which is the main subject or verb? Is the word "what" used in this case correctly?

Mr Gavai the growths removed earlier this week, in what the surgeons believe may be a world-record operation. (From Dailymail)

 

[MikeNewYork]

Did you copy that correctly? As written, it is not a complete sentence.

 

[JMurray]

not a teacher

Mr Gavai the growths removed earlier this week,…

The Daily Mail online does have it in this form.
I can only think that it's a mistake and they mean, "Mr Gavai had the growths removed earlier this week,…".

 

[MikeNewYork]

That makes sense.

 

[Tdol]

The Mail online publishes pages at speed to try to get traffic. This means that editing and checking is not perfect and mistakes do get through. If you think that something is missing or wrong, you may well be right. Grammatical perfection is one of the things that has had to be sacrificed to enable many news sites to produce rolling news 24/7.

 

[Raymott]

So you get your news instantly, but it could be wrong. Is this what we want? I guess many do. I only hope future generations will retain the ability to recognise thoughtful, quality journalism even if takes a little longer to get an informed opinion and correct news.

Our major daily (at least in its 'net form) has gone this way, and is full of errors. This is from this morning's edition (albeit not exactly wrong):
"Officers then went to see the boy’s mother, 39-year-old Samantha Starnes, 39."

 

[MikeNewYork]

Headline mistakes and ambiguities have led to a new phrase "crash blossoms". This is derived from the following headline: VIOLINIST LINKED TO JAL CRASH BLOSSOMS.

That led to someone wondering what "crash blossoms" were. Interestingly, the man who coined the phrase was named Daniel Bloom. :lol:

 

[Barb_D]

So you get your news instantly, but it could be wrong.

I'm a lot more tolerant of grammar and punctuation mistakes than factual mistakes.
Getting news up (as much as is known) right away is better than waiting for an editor to point out a wrong verb form.

But getting news up before it's confirmed is unacceptable. When Giffords was shot, a number of outlets said she died. When Sandy Hook happened, the name released was the brother of the guy who did it, who immediately got harrassing messages. (Rather pointless, since they did accurately report that the shooter was dead. What's the point of posting rude messages on the Facebook wall of a dead guy?) Those types of mistakes are far worse than missing a word.

 

[Tdol]

So am I, but when I saw I would of done on a British newspaper site, I did have second thoughts.

 

[Tdol]

I only hope future generations will retain the ability to recognise thoughtful, quality journalism even if takes a little longer to get an informed opinion and correct news.

I don't see why getting fast but sloppy news will stop people from reading more in-depth and thoughtful reports. I read both.

 

[Raymott]

Yes, but have been brought up reading newspapers. Do kids read print newspapers today?

 

[Tdol]

Print newspapers are in free-fall, which may have serious repercussions, but I am not sure that this means that serious journalism is also doomed.