A regional daily made a charity donation as a gesture to a reader after it printed the wrong photograph in an article about the death of one of her family members.

The woman complained that The Citizen, Gloucester, breached Clause 1 (Accuracy), Clause 4 (Intrusion into grief or shock) and Clause 5 (Reporting of suicide) in an article which reported on an inquest into the death of a member of her family.

The unnamed complainant said that the article included a photograph of someone other than her family member.

While The Citizen said that it was within its rights to publish a report on the inquest proceedings, it accepted that the article included a photograph of the wrong person.

It offered to remove the article from its website, make efforts to contact third party websites that had republished the articles to have these removed, remove all photographs from its internal database, write the complainant a letter of apology and agreed not to republish the article.

In addition, The Citizen also agreed to make a donation to a charity of the complainant’s choice and to circulate internal guidance emphasising the importance of handling such matters sensitively.

The complainant said the actions resolved the matter to her satisfaction, and IPSO did not make an adjudication on whether there had been any breach of code.

The full resolution statement can be read here.

Other recent IPSO cases involving regional newspapers include:

Gillespie v Macclesfield Express

Helen Gillespie complained to the press watchdog after a weekly newspaper recycled her quote about a visit by Father Christmas to children on its patch.

She complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation over a Macclesfield Express article which reported that Santa would be handing out presents to boys and girls on the town’s Moss estate.

The complainant, one of the event’s organisers, was quoted in the piece but said that while she did contact the newspaper about the event, she did not provide them with any quotation.

The Express responded it had re-used the complainant’s quote from an article written about the same event the previous year.

It added that the article was a positive one, was written at the request of the complainant, there was no malice intended on the newspaper’s part, and it had offered to send a private letter of apology to the complainant as well as publish a clarification.

As a result, ISPO did not make a determination as to whether there had been any breach of Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice.

The full resolution statement can be read here.

Lennox v The Scotsman

Sarah Lennox complained that The Scotsman breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) in an opinion piece headlined ‘Dare to debate this damaging idea that gender is a social construct’.

The complainant expressed concern that the newspaper had published an opinion piece that included comments made by Professor Paul McHugh which had given the significantly misleading impression that the Johns Hopkins Medical School, one of the first institutions in the world to offer gender reassignment surgery, did not offer the procedures because they were “harmful”.

She said in his role as Chair of the Department of Psychiatry, Professor McHugh had ended gender reassignment surgery at the medical school in 1978, but that he had retired from this role 16 years ago, and the medical school had since made clear that it was now “committed to providing gender reassignment surgery”.

The Scotsman accepted that the article had given the incorrect impression that gender reassignment procedures were no longer being carried out at the Johns Hopkins Medical School, and offered to amend the online article as well as publish a clarification.

The complainant said the actions resolved the matter to her satisfaction, and IPSO did not make an adjudication on whether there had been any breach of code.

The full resolution statement can be read here.