AddThis SmartLayers

Weekly forced to apologise over clarification

A weekly newspaper which published a clarification following a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission has been forced to apologise after it contained an inaccuracy.

The Darlington & Stockton Times was reported to the PCC by local councillor Catherine Lumb, who complained that a headline in a story about her was in breach of Clause One of the Editors’ Code which covers accuracy.

The headline claimed she had been ‘censured’ by the Hambleton District Council standards hearing panel for breaching the Councillors’ Code of Conduct – but in fact, as the body of the article stated, a decision on censure was pending.

The paper published a clarification in an attempt to resolve the issue, but this led to a second complaint to the watchdog on the grounds that this article was also wrong.

It stated that the alleged breach of the councillor’s code of conduct related to the handling of a planning application for Bagby Airport, when in fact no specific application had been discussed at the parish council meeting in question.

Councillor Lumb also complained that the clarification lacked prominence.

The PCC negotiated the publication of a second clarification, which stated:

“On August 31, we published a clarification about a report published on August 24, relating to Thirkleby High and Low with Osgodby Parish Council, Bagby Airfield and the conduct of two parish councillors. The clarification made reference to discussion of a planning application relating to the airfield at a meeting of the parish council.

“We have been asked to point out that the council discussion about the airfield was not about a specific planning application. We apologise for the error.”

3 comments

You can follow all replies to this entry through the comments feed.
  • January 4, 2013 at 10:01 am
    Permalink

    Newspapers often go into denial when they make a mistake. Hence the absurd use of the term ‘clarification’ when what is needed is a correction and, occasionally, an apology. I hated having to use ‘clarification,’ knowing full well that what we were offering was little more than a futile attempt to be clever with words. If the newspaper in this case had had the decency to confirm the clarification with the complainant an embarrassing follow-up would have been averted. A little more honesty would not go amiss.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • January 4, 2013 at 11:24 am
    Permalink

    I quite agree with “Ex-Insider” – newspapers and magazines in the UK are unnecessarily reticent about using the word “correction”.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • January 7, 2013 at 3:47 pm
    Permalink

    Let’s put it another way. Reporters should try getting it right first time and subs should read the story before writing headlines.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)