Decision
of the Complaints Committee – 09166-20 MacGregor v The Scotsman
Summary
of Complaint
1. David
MacGregor complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that The
Scotsman breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an
article headlined “Scottish death rate third in world as care home testing row
intensifies” published on 11 June 2020.
2. The
article reported that statistics from the National Records of Scotland, which
included deaths where coronavirus was suspected but not confirmed as no test
was carried out, placed Scotland third worst in the world for the number of
Covid-19 deaths for every million people. It said that the rate of coronavirus
deaths in Scotland had reached 733 for every million people, behind England on
767 and Belgium on 842. The rest of the article reported on criticism of the Scottish
government and its response, and comments on testing for coronavirus and
infection rates in care homes.
3. The
article also appeared online in a shorter form with the headline “Scotland
coronavirus death rate third worst in the world”. It repeated the claim
regarding the death rate in Scotland compared to other countries around the
world.
4. The
complainant said that the article was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1. He said
that the number of deaths announced by the UK government counted only those
deaths which had occurred in hospitals and care homes and had been confirmed by
test to have been due to Covid-19. He said that Scotland however counted all
deaths which had been confirmed via testing to have been due to Covid-19, as
well as deaths where the doctor signing the death certificate had mentioned
Covid-19 as being the main or suspected cause of death. He said that by this
second calculation, Scotland had a death rate of 727 per million people, whilst
the rest of the UK had a rate of 1003 per million people by the same
calculation. He said that the two countries used different methods to report
the death rates, and in comparing them, the newspaper was not comparing like
for like. As such, the article was misleading as to the difference between
Scotland and England.
5. The
newspaper did not accept that the article was inaccurate, or that it had
compared statistics arrived at by different methods. It said that since late
April, the UK government used the same, more robust method of reporting deaths
as that originally adopted by the National Records of Scotland. It said that in
calculating the Scottish figures, it used sums which covered all cases where
Covid-19 was mentioned on the death certificate, as well as confirmed in a laboratory
test. It said that it used this figure rather that the figure given at Scottish
Government briefings which only included the lab test deaths. It said that in
relation to the English figures, these were taken from Public Health England,
which included figures which reported on deaths where there had been no lab
test result but where Covid-19 has been recorded on the death certificate as an
underlying cause, as well as those where Covid-19 had detected via a lab
result. It said that therefore, in comparing the two countries, it not only
used the same method but also used the more robust measure of counting Covid-19
deaths. It said that it relied on two independent statistical websites to
obtain the death rates for the UK, and then used the calculation set out above
to split this rate between Scotland and England.
Relevant
Code Provisions
6. Clause
1 (Accuracy)
i) The
Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted
information or images, including headlines not supported by the text.
ii) A
significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion must be corrected,
promptly and with due prominence, and — where appropriate — an apology
published. In cases involving IPSO, due prominence should be as required by the
regulator.
iii) A
fair opportunity to reply to significant inaccuracies should be given, when
reasonably called for.
iv) The
Press, while free to editorialise and campaign, must distinguish clearly between
comment, conjecture and fact.
Findings
of the Committee
7. The
Committee first acknowledged that the use of different methodologies to define
what constitutes a Covid-related death has made comparative reporting of
statistics during the pandemic an area of widespread contention. The newspaper
had arrived at the claim that Scotland’s death rate was third worst in the
world via its own calculations, based on statistics showing the UK death rate.
It was able to explain how these individual rates had been calculated, and that
the rates between Scotland and England had been calculated using comparable
measures – both deaths verified with a lab test, and deaths where Covid-19 had
been listed as an underlying cause. As such, there was a basis to report that
Scotland’s death rate was 733 per million people compared with 767 per million
in England, and as such, that Scotland death rate was the third worst in the
world. There was no failure to take care over the accuracy of the article, and
not significant inaccuracy requiring correction. There was no breach of Clause
1.
Conclusions
8. The
complaint was not upheld
Remedial
Action Required
9. N/A
Date
complaint received: 12/06/20
Date
decision issued: 17/12/20