From The Guardian, 20 February 2010 (page 15).
Submitted by Dr. Michael Gross who comments:
Ironically, this appeared on the back of the same sheet of paper on which columnist Simon Hoggart talked about crash blossoms and cited a few examples readers sent in, mostly from faraway places and times, when in fact there was such a nice one on the other side …
I don’t get it…
I guess it’s that the apology is by Brown and/or it’s a brown-colored apology.
To me, these aren’t truly ambiguous. They’re newspaper headlines, so you’d see them in print, not hear them, so I don’t think it should count if the ambiguity has to do with formatting (e.g., capital letters).
The ambiguity is whether the children were sent to Australia to get the apology or whether Brown had to apologize for them being sent to Australia. That is: “Children (were) sent to Australia (in order) to get Brown apology” versus “Children (who were) sent to Australia (are going) to get Brown apology”.