A professor involved in a row about alleged transphobia has had her complaint against a regional daily rejected by the press watchdog.

Selina Todd made a complaint about the Oxford Mail after it ran a story that reported she had been “accused of being ‘transphobic’ by students” – an allegation she denies.

The professor of modern history at the University of Oxford claimed the story inaccurately described her as transphobic when this had just been an accusation made by the university’s LGBTQ+ society.

Prof Todd further claimed it was inaccurate to call her “Ms” in the story in question rather than using her professional title, and that this was significant where the story impugned her professionalism.

She also added she had not been contacted in advance of the story, which was published in November 2019.

Denying a breach of Code, the Mail said allegations that Prof Todd was transphobic were in the public domain, and that it had published the claims again in good faith.

The Mail also said that it believed it had contacted her at the time, but it could not be certain or provide evidence of this due to the length of time that had passed between publication and IPSO’s investigation.

It added it was not significantly inaccurate to refer to her as “Ms” rather than “professor”.

IPSO found Prof Todd had not been describe in the story as being transphobic as a matter of fact, but that she had been “accused of being ‘transphobic’ by students at the college”.

Prof Todd had herself accepted that it was accurate to report that this accusation had been levelled at her, although IPSO said it was misleading not to include in the story her denial of this accusation or to contact her in advance of the article for her comment.

Due to the length of time that had passed between the story’s publication and the investigation, the Committee could not determine whether Prof Todd had been contacted prior to the story, and could not make a finding on this point.

However, where it was clear that the allegations formed part of a contentious debate and were the opinion of a named group of students and not a statement of fact by the Mail, IPSO found it was not a failure to take care not to publish Ms Todd’s denial that she was “transphobic”, or to refer to accusations of transphobia against her.

IPSO noted Prof Todd’s concern that she had been described as “Ms” rather than “professor”, and the impact this had on her professionalism.

While the Committee noted she preferred to be referenced using this title, the story had made clear she was a professor and it did not consider that the use of a title that did not reflect her occupation to be a significant inaccuracy.

The complaint was not upheld, and the full adjudication can be read here.