The sister of a man who fled a terror attack while clutching a pint complained to the press watchdog after a regional daily published comments she made on Facebook.

Paul Armstrong’s story was widely reported after he was photographed running with a glass of beer from the scene of the London Bridge attack, which claimed the lives of eight victims in June.

The Liverpool Echo managed to find a local angle on the story after Mr Armstrong’s sister Katharine speculated on the social networking website that it was her brother in the picture.

The Echo then ran a story saying that a Facebook post shared by a relative claimed he is from Maghull, near Liverpool, joking that he was clutching onto the pint because of unreasonably high beer prices in the capital.

But Ms Armstrong complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that the Echo’s story breached Clause 1 (Accuracy), Clause 2 (Privacy) and Clause 3 (Harassment) of the Editors’ Code of Practice.

She said that she had not shared her comments speculating on the man’s identity publicly, adding no further steps were taken by the newspaper to establish the veracity of her claims.

In response, the Echo said it had reported Ms Armstrong’s post accurately and noted her Facebook privacy settings were set to “Friends of Friends”.

As a result, the Echo claimed there was no reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of a post which would have been seen by individuals both inside and outside her friendship network.

While the newspaper did not accept a breach of the Code, it expressed regret that the article had caused the complainant upset.

The complainant said that this resolved the matter to her satisfaction, with IPSO making no adjudication as a result, and the full resolution statement can be read here.

Other recent IPSO cases involving regional newspapers include:

Adamowicz v Wigan Today

Barbara Adamowicz complained that Wigan Today breached Clause 2 (Privacy), Clause 4 (Intrusion into grief or shock) and Clause 6 (Children) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article about the death of her late husband’s death at work, which contained a photograph of the two of them and their young son.

Mrs Adamowicz said the photograph had been published without her consent.

Wigan Today expressed its condolences for the complainant and her family at this difficult time. It said that it had obtained the photograph from an individual who had approached the newspaper, purporting to be a friend of the family, and had published it in good faith.

It offered to write a private letter of apology and gave an assurance that it would not use the photograph in the future, which resolved the matter to the complainant’s satisfaction.

No adjudication was made on breach of Code, and the full resolution statement can be read here.

O’Hara v Bradford Telegraph & Argus

Martin O’Hara complained that the Bradford Telegraph & Argus had breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice after the newspaper failed to inform him it had edited a letter he submitted for publication in which he put on record his concerns about the Labour Party candidate in his local area.

Mr O’Hara said that following the editing process this aspect of his letter had been omitted, which had affected the meaning and balance of his letter because it had suggested that he fully supported the Labour Party and its candidate.

The Telegraph & Argus said that it had always reserved the right to edit correspondence, as made clear on its letters page every day, and did not accept that the editing process had altered the meaning of the complainant’s letter.

Following IPSO’s intervention, the T&A invited the complainant to submit a further letter for publication and also offered to publish a clarification.

Mr O’Hara said that this resolved the matter to his satisfaction, with IPSO making no adjudication as a result, and the full resolution statement can be read here.

Kusz v Daily Record

Robert Kusz complained that the Daily Record breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) and Clause 3 (Harassment) in an article about his partner’s conviction for benefit fraud.

Mr Kusz said her name had been inaccurately reported, but the Glasgow-based Record said there was information in the public domain that demonstrated she went by the name that was reported.

However, it offered to amend the article to contain the woman’s preferred name, which resolved the matter to Mr Kusz’s satisfaction.

The full resolution statement can be read here.

Fortune v Daily Record

Mark Fortune complained that the Daily Record breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) Clause 2 (Privacy) and Clause 10 (Clandestine devices and subterfuge) in an article which reported he had been refused entry to Edinburgh Council’s Landlord Register after threatening to have tenants shot.

The article reported on a number of complaints from tenants and also reported Mr Fortune’s responses to these complaints.

In his complaint to IPSO, Mr Fortune objected to reporting of his spent convictions and denied that he had threatened to have a tenant shot, but said he had pleaded guilty to a breach of the peace in relation to an argument he had with a tenant.

He expressed concern that an accompanying photograph referring to him as a ‘blue badge cheat’ had been taken covertly and said he had been parking his car while accompanied by a blue badge holder.

The Record said that while the complainant had issued threats which referred to shooting, it accepted that the complainant had not threatened to shoot tenants directly and offered to correct this point, which it said was the result of an error in the sub-editing process.

The newspaper said that the claim that the complainant was a “blue badge cheat” was from an article published in 2010, which it did not believe the complainant had previously challenged, and which it said it was reasonable to rely on.

The photograph of the car wa taken in a public place and details of Mr Fortune’s spent convictions were available in the public domain.

Following IPSO’s intervention, the Record offered to publish a clarification which resolved the matter to Mr Fortune’s satisfaction.

The full resolution statement can be read here.