AddThis SmartLayers

Ex-editor drops claim over old paper's ad rates

A former weekly editor who published an online story claiming his old paper was charging nearly £50,000 for a public notice has withdrawn the claim.

David Jackman, formerly of the Epping Forest Guardian, published the story in good faith on the hyperlocal website he now runs, Everything Epping Forest.

The story was based on apparently inaccurate information contained in an Epping Forest District Council agenda and a subsequent debate at a meeting of the authority.

A council webcast of the meeting has also been taken down in addition to David’s story.

The issue blew up after Newquest-owned Guardian’s sister free title the Epping Forest Independent ran six pages of council advertising in relation to a public consultation over a review of car parking in the borough.

It is understood that the total cost of these ads to the council was £14,000.

Newsquest was then approached about running the same series of ads in the paid-for Guardian.

The original Everything Epping Forest story reported claims made at the council meeting that a figure of £47,433 per insertion had been quoted, and that as a result, the whole parking scheme was under threat.

A statement on the website said: “A story was published on Everything Epping Forest under the heading ‘£50,000 adverts may scupper parking reviews.’

“The article quoted figures provided to the district council and which were referred to in a debate. Councillors criticised the figures which they were told had been quoted for advertising charges relating to the reviews.

“Newsquest Media Group, which publishes the Epping Forest Guardian, states that the story was completely untrue and arose from mistaken figures given out in a council debate. The story has been withdrawn.”

A spokesman for the council added: “We are hearing lots of different things and we are looking into it. We have reported what we have been told and now someone else is telling us something different. We are trying to get to the bottom of it.”

Newsquest has so far made no public comment on the episode.

Comments

Hyper about local (15/06/2010 11:58:55)
A good case in point about why hyperlocal sites need to remember journalistic law. If it was in a council report, it is covered by privilege. There’s no reason to withdraw the article, just give Newsquest a comment.

Immensities (15/06/2010 13:04:12)
Hmm no. I read the initial story with interest. Two things would cancel out qualified privilege:
i)The council agenda item was largely about an issue regarding the county council. This was not reported on the website article where the focus was solely on that of newspaper advertising. Issue: fair and accurate report of council proceedings
ii) The article was largely written as a puff for the author’s own website with explicit references to its “cheap” advertising rate as compared to the newspaper’s supposedly “outrageous” rate. Issue: Malicious intent.
Both these issues would render qualified privilege invalid.
Yes I did study law.