Decision
of the Complaints Committee 01572-14 Hawk v Witney Gazette
Summary of complaint
1.
Maddison Hawk complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that
the Witney Gazette had breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of
Practice in an article headlined “Witney accountant told to pay £8k for selling
fake GHD hairdryers that could have injured users”, published on 15 October
2014.
2.
The article reported that the complainant had admitted four trademark offence
charges on behalf of her company, as well as one offence of selling a product
which breached safety regulations. It said that she had been fined more than
£8,000 as a result.
3.
The complainant said that it was inaccurate to say that she had pleaded guilty;
she had pleaded guilty on behalf of her company.
4.
The newspaper provided a copy of the court register, which stated that the
complainant had pleaded guilty, as an individual, to failing to comply with the
Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 1994. It did not accept that the
article was inaccurate.
Relevant Code
Provisions
5. Clause 1
(Accuracy)
i) The press must
take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information,
including pictures.
ii) A significant inaccuracy or misleading distortion
once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and –
where appropriate – an apology published.
Findings of the
Committee
6. The article had made clear that “Hawk admitted four
trademark offence charges on behalf of her company and a single offence of
selling a product which breached safety regulations”. The complainant is the
sole director of her company. In this context, the references to the
complainant and her company were not significantly misleading; a correction was
not required under the terms of Clause 1 (ii).
Conclusions
7. The complaint was
not upheld.
Remedial Action
Required
N/A
Date complaint
received: 22/10/2014
Date decision issued: 13/03/2015