Journalists on research: we've heard of it

Grauniad journalist writing on the injury of Afghan children by a British Apache:

Five Afghan children have been injured, some seriously, by cannon fire from a British Apache helicopter, according to UK defence officials.

It is believed they were hit by stray bullets during an intended attack on an insurgent as they worked in a field in the Nahr-e-Saraj district of Helmand province, on Saturday.

I can assure Mr. Norton-Taylor (the author of the piece) that, had any of the children been hit by a stray 30mm high-explosive cannon shell (aka 'bullet') from the Apache's cannon, they'd have been a good few steps beyond "seriously injured".

I realise that 'accuracy' comes a distant 10th to 'sensation' in a journalist's priorities, but is there any chance they could get a grasp of the relevant facts? Being hit by shrapnel from the cannon shell splash isn't a fun day out, and one can only hope that the children recover and their families are compensated, but it would be nice for a British newspaper not to give the impression that British Apache gunners go around spraying fire at random passers-by.