· Decision of the Complaints Committee 01241-14 Hope v Ayrshire Post
Summary of
complaint
1. Jonathan Hope complained to the Independent Press
Standards Organisation that the Ayrshire Post had breached Clause 1 (Accuracy)
of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Porn creep backed
kids”, published on 10 August 2014.
2. The article said that the complainant had a criminal
conviction for downloading child pornography, and that the parents of children
involved with a youth football team sponsored by the complainant had been
“disgusted” when this had been discovered. It said that he had been convicted
in 2003 under the name “Steven Hope”. It also reported that despite his
conviction, he had visited an orphanage in 2012.
3. The complainant said that the coverage had
misrepresented his role with the youth football club; he was not actively
involved with the club and did not sponsor the team, although his name had been
put on the back of the shirts as a gesture for his having found the team a
sponsor. He also said that the article had inaccurately reported that the
orphanage had struggled to contact him after his visit. The complainant
expressed concern that the journalist had used his involvement in football as a
means to disclose the fact that he had a spent criminal conviction.
4. The newspaper said that as the complainant’s name had
appeared on the back of the youth football club’s shirts, it had not been
significantly misleading to report that he sponsored the club.
5. The newspaper said that it was entitled to publish
details of the complainant’s conviction, particularly as it was a matter of
public concern given his involvement with the children’s football club.
6. The newspaper raised serious concerns about the
conduct of the complainant during the course of Ipso’s investigation, including
allegations that the complainant had sent abusive messages over the internet to
the reporter who had provided material for this report and others under
complaint. These allegations (denied by the complainant) formed the basis of a
complaint to the police and the matter remains under the consideration of the
Procurator Fiscal as of the date this decision was issued.
Relevant Code Provisions
7. Clause 1 (Accuracy)
i) The press must take care not to publish inaccurate,
misleading or distorted information, including pictures.
ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or
distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence,
and – where appropriate – an apology published.
Findings of the Committee
8. The complainant accepted that his name had featured on
the football kit of the youth team in response to his playing a direct role in
arranging the team’s sponsorship. The article reported concerns raised in
relation to his association with children in light of his conviction. In this
context, it had not been significantly misleading to state that he had
sponsored the club. There was no breach of the Code on this point.
9. In the context of concerns that the complainant had
been involved with an orphanage despite having a criminal conviction relating
to child pornography, whether or not the orphanage had subsequently struggled
to contact the complainant had not been a significant detail such as to warrant
correction under the terms of the Code.
10. The selection of material for publication is a matter
for the discretion of individual editors, provided that such editorial
decisions do not engage the terms of the Editors’ Code. It had not been
inaccurate to report that the complainant had a previous criminal conviction.
There was no breach of the Code.
Conclusions
11. The complaint was not upheld.
Remedial Action Required
N/A
Date complaint received: 27/03/2015
Date decision issued: 15/05/2015