AddThis SmartLayers

Paper rapped for pupil’s quotes on porn star teacher

A weekly newspaper has been rapped by the Press Complaints Commission after it printed comments attributed to a schoolgirl about a teacher who had worked as a porn star.

A complaint was made by Ravin Soobadoo about the Wanstead and Woodford Guardian after it published quotes which he said were wrongly attributed to his 14-year-old daughter in an online article on 13 July.

He said comments in the article, headlined ‘Porn star teacher’s sadness at leaving job’, had not been made by his daughter and that she had been incorrectly referred to as a sixth form student.

The PCC upheld his complaint under Clauses 1 (Accuracy) and 6 (Children) of the Editors’ Code of Practice, saying the newspaper should have taken more care in using the comments, which it received in an email.

In the article, it reported that a teacher had stepped down from his job after it had been found he had been working as a porn star.

In its initial coverage of the story, the newspaper had, at the end of an article, asked for comments from pupils and parents.

The complainant’s daughter, who was 14, was quoted in the piece saying the teacher had spoken “openly and truthfully about sex” and that she would “more likely catch STIs without his lessons”.

The complainant said that his daughter had not made any comment to the newspaper, saying her account may have been hacked, and she was not a “sixth-form student”.

He contacted the newspaper directly, which removed the quote from the online article.

Mr Soobadoo said the newspaper should have taken care to authenticate the quotation, and obtain the necessary consent, before publication.

In its defence, the newspaper said it understood the teacher only taught sex education to sixth-formers, so it had assumed the comments were from a pupil over 16.

The paper said there was no evidence the comments did not come from the complainant’s daughter and it had not interviewed her, saying the publication of comments was not an intrusion.

In its decision, the Commission said it was concerned the newspaper had not taken more care following the receipt of the email because it had not established the age of the complainant’s daughter.

It accepted the newspaper had not approached the girl directly but it had requested information from school pupils on a controversial issue – so had engaged in an interview of sorts.

The Commission said the comments referred to the sexual health of the pupil, which related to her welfare, and her age should have been established.

It upheld the complaint and welcomed the fact the newspaper had changed its policy on requesting comments from readers on school-related stories.

PCC director Stephen Abell said: “Clause 6 of the Editors’ Code rightly goes to great lengths to protect children under 16, and prevents children from being interviewed on issues involving their welfare without the consent of a custodial parent.

“Given the nature of the quoted comments, the newspaper should have sought to make further enquiries before publication, and in particular established the age of the child concerned. This ruling should remind editors of the importance of the strict provisions of the Code as they relate to a child’s welfare”.

4 comments

You can follow all replies to this entry through the comments feed.
  • November 3, 2010 at 10:33 am
    Permalink

    Oh dear. The dangers of lazy and sloppy journalism encouraged by the web, facebook et al. Why would you use a supposed quote from a kid in such a sensitive case without checking?

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(1)
  • November 3, 2010 at 1:00 pm
    Permalink

    Pure and simple, the paper was sloppy. If they lifted the quote from online, how do they know it was correct? How do they know the person they attributed it to, actually said (wrote) it? They don’t. The only was to check it is to contact them and confirm it.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(1)
  • November 4, 2010 at 1:04 pm
    Permalink

    guess there have always been lazy and sloppy hacks, but the web makes it a whole lot more dangerous.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(1)