When a story is published that is so obviously wholly inaccurate it is hard to know quite how to describe it. A mistake? A falsehood? A flyer?

About an hour ago, the Daily Telegraph posted a story on its website saying The Guardian is "seriously discussing" end to print edition.

But the truth is, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, is that The Guardian isn't about to do any such thing.

Of course, as with every paper in this transitory phase between print and screen, its executives are always doing their sums. At some point the economics may work out in favour of going digital only. At present, that just isn't the case.

There has not been any discussion suggesting that The Guardian will cease publishing in print any time soon.

Nor do I give any credence to the other central claim in the Telegraph tale about there being a split over the issue between the editor-in-chief, Alan Rusbridger, and members of the paper's ultimate owner, the Scott Trust.

I understand that Rusbridger and the chief executive of the Guardian Media Group, Andrew Miller, are baffled by this story. There is not a scintilla of truth in the two major facts in an article noticeable for the absence of any named source and also for the fact that no questions were asked of Rusbridger or Miller.

In Fleet Street parlance, this could be deemed a flyer - a story you run up the flagpole hoping someone will salute. But no-one will be lifting an arm. It's just wrong. Plain wrong.