Decision of the Complaints Committee 01983-15 Foster v
Event Magazine
Summary of
complaint
1. Marvin Foster complained to the Independent Press
Standards Organisation that Event Magazine had breached Clause 1 (Accuracy),
Clause 2 (Opportunity to reply), Clause 3 (Privacy), Clause 4 (Harassment),
Clause 5 (Intrusion into grief or shock), Clause 10 (Clandestine devices and
subterfuge) and Clause 14 (Confidential sources) in an article headlined “Staff
Warehouse workers begin employment tribunal process”, published on 25 March
2015.
2. The article reported that employees previously hired
by Staff Warehouse were beginning the employment tribunal process over concerns
about non-payment. The complainant, managing director of Staff Warehouse, was
quoted in the article as saying that “these staff are being paid”.
3. The complainant was concerned that the article was
inaccurate as workers had not begun the employment tribunal process. He also
said that the article represented a breach of Clause 3 (Privacy) and Clause 14
(Confidential sources) as the article had included comments from his
correspondence, which he said was not intended for publication. His comment had
been included in an email which had said he would “not engage” with the
magazine.
4. The complainant said that the newspaper had breached
Clause 4 (Harassment) as he had spoken to the publication and asked them to
“leave it” as he was dealing with the staff himself. He also said that the
article represented a breach of Clause 5 (Intrusion into grief or shock).
5. The complainant also expressed concern that the
magazine had spoken to former employees who had recorded conversations without
consent, in breach of Clause 10 (Clandestine devices and subterfuge).
6. The magazine did not accept that the article
represented a breach of Code. It said that the article was of significant
public interest, and proper steps had been taken prior to publication to verify
its accuracy.
7. The magazine said that it had become aware of a
Facebook group which contained comments from people who claimed to be owed
money by the company. The reporter had contacted the complainant who had
admitted that there were a few “slightly delayed” payments but it was “nothing
major”.
8. The reporter was contacted by members of the group,
some of whom wished to remain anonymous and some of whom were happy to go on
record. One of the people she interviewed said that he was owed £872. The
magazine took the view that there was a public interest in the story, and
decided to ask the complainant for further comment.
9. The complainant had emailed the reporter and said “I
will not engage with either you or your staff as you are part of the FB
[Facebook] chain / Group which violated me as a person. These staff are being
paid”. The complainant’s response did not say that these comments were not for
publication. As it was said in response to a request for comment, the magazine
considered that it had been reasonable to assume his comments could be
published.
10. The magazine subsequently received confirmation of
the commencement of the employment tribunal process via the Advisory, Conciliation
and Arbitration Service (Acas) Early Conciliation Service. It provided a copy
of the certificate.
11. The magazine offered the complainant the opportunity
to participate in a follow up article. The complainant declined to participate.
Relevant Code Provisions
12. 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.
Clause 2 (Opportunity to reply)
A fair opportunity to reply to inaccuracies must be given
when reasonably called for.
Clause 3 (Privacy)
Everyone is entitled to respect for his or her private
and family life, home, health and correspondence, including digital
communications.
Clause 4 (Harassment)
i) Journalists must not engage in intimidation,
harassment or persistent pursuit.
ii) They must not persist in questioning, telephoning,
pursuing or photographing individuals once asked to desist; nor remain on their
property when asked to leave and must not follow them. If requested, they must
identify themselves and whom they represent.
Clause 5 (Intrusion into grief or shock)
i) In cases involving personal grief or shock, enquiries
and approaches must be made with sympathy and discretion and publication
handled sensitively. This should not restrict the right to report legal
proceedings, such as inquests.
Clause 10 (Clandestine devices and subterfuge)
The press must not seek to obtain or publish material
acquired by using hidden cameras or clandestine listening devices.
Clause 14 (Confidential source)
Journalists have a moral obligation to protect
confidential sources of information.
Findings of the Committee
13. The magazine had spoken to former employees, some of
whom had commented on the record. It had asked the complainant for comment on
the allegations of non-payment, and had obtained documentation from the
Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service which indicated that employees
had taken the first step to commence proceedings. The Committee was therefore
satisfied that the magazine had not failed to take care over the accuracy of
the article. There was no breach of Clause 1 (i). On the basis of the evidence
provided by the magazine, the Committee did not find that it had been
inaccurate to report that workers were beginning the employment tribunal
process. There was no breach of Clause 1.
14. The article had included the complainant’s comment
that “these staff are being paid”. While the Committee noted the
complainant’s position that he had not intended this comment for publication,
it had been included in correspondence to the magazine in response to a request
for comment, and the correspondence had not made clear that it was not for
publication. The remark did not include any private information and its
publication did not represent an intrusion into his privacy. There was no
breach of Clause 3. There had been no suggestion that the complainant should be
considered a confidential source. There was no breach of Clause 14.
15. The magazine had attempted to contact the complainant
for comment prior to the publication of the article to ensure that the article
accurately reflected his position. There was no suggestion that the reporter
had made approaches to the complainant following a request to desist. There was
no breach of Clause 4.
16. Clause 2 provides individuals the opportunity to
respond to published inaccuracies when reasonably called for. The Committee had
not established the existence of inaccuracies such as to have engaged the terms
of the Code. Nonetheless, it welcomed the magazine’s offer for the complainant
to contribute to a follow-up article.
17. The terms of Clause 5 relate to the obligations of
publications when reporting on instances of personal grief or shock, and are
designed to protect victims, and their families, from unwanted journalistic
intrusion and insensitivity when they are at their most vulnerable. Coverage
about the complainant’s business did not engage the terms of Clause 5.
18. The Committee noted that the complainant had also
expressed concern that former employees had recorded conversations without his
consent. The complainant had not suggested that the magazine had sought to
obtain, or published, material acquired by use of a clandestine device. The
terms of Clause 10 (Clandestine devices and subterfuge) were not engaged.
Conclusions
19. The complaint was not upheld.
Remedial Action Required
N/A
Date complaint received: 26/03/2015
Date decision issued: 25/06/2015