The Boston Transcript paper had an unwavering injunction against any reference to anatomy. It was a delicate one; for instance, eyes or noses were permitted but navels were not.
On one occasion, there came a reporter who used the word “navel” in an article. When the managing editor spotted it, the edition had already gone to press. As he had no luxury of replacing the article with another one, he ordered that the word just be pulled from the typesetter and the edition be reprinted.
As a result, in the paper sold on the street that evening, there appeared an article that a concert musician had been “in a state of repose as complete as that of a Buddhist regarding his .”
The managing editor had time to spot the forbidden word, but not enough time to read the full context. If he had, he would have understood that it was a review of a concert and that the writer was trying to report how wonderful the concert was, describing a moment that was especially impressive by comparing it to a Buddhist Zazen training pose. The managing editor could have then used his own discretion and decided that the violation was an innocent one and kept printing the edition as it was.