Resolution
Statement – 09601-21 Bradley v kentlive.news
Summary
of Complaint
1. Christabel
Bradley complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that
kentlive.news breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in
an article headlined “15 of the biggest mistakes in Kent's history - from the
DartCharge to Manston Airport”, published on 31 August 2021.
2. The
article reported a list of the 15 “biggest mistakes in Kent’s history” which
included the closure of Manston Airport. The article claimed that the Secretary
of State had given a proposed £330 million freight air cargo hub the green
light “a few days ago”.
3. The
complainant said that the article was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1 because
the Secretary of State had granted a Development Consent Order (DCO) into
Manston in July 2020 but, following a Judicial Review, it was revoked at the
end of 2020. She also said the decision/DCO was still being reviewed at the
time the article was published. Therefore, the assertion that the cargo hub had
been given the green light “a few days ago” was misleading.
4. The
publication said it accepted the article was inaccurate and during the referral
period, offered to amend the article and publish the following footnote
clarification:
A
previous version of this article stated the Secretary of State gave plans for a
£330m freight air cargo hub the green light 'a few days ago'. In fact, this was
given the green light in July 2020. We are happy to clarify this.
5. The
Complainant did not accept this as a resolution to her complaint as it did not
make clear that the Secretary of State’s ‘green light’ for the freight air
cargo hub had to be withdrawn following a Judicial Review.
Relevant
Code Provisions
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.
Mediated
Outcome
6. The
complaint was not resolved through direct correspondence between the parties.
IPSO therefore began an investigation into the matter.
7. During
IPSO’s investigation the publication offered to amend the article and,
following a further proposed wording which was rejected by the complainant,
print the following footnote correction:
A
previous version of this article stated the Secretary of State gave plans for a
freight air cargo hub the green light 'a few days ago'. In fact, the Secretary
of State gave the green light in July 2020. Following a Judicial Review, he had
to retract his decision in December 2020. After further submissions were
sought, a new decision is pending.
8. The
complainant said that this would resolve the matter to her satisfaction.
9. As the complaint was successfully mediated,
the Complaints Committee did not make a determination as to whether there had
been any breach of the Code.
Date
complaint received: 2 September 2021
Date
complaint concluded by IPSO: 3 November 2021
The Independent Press Standards Organisation C.I.C. is a Community Interest Company limited by guarantee and registered in England and Wales with registered number 02538908.
