Decision
of the Complaints Committee – 09741-21 Woodcock v dailyrecord.co.uk
Summary
of Complaint
1. Simon
Woodcock complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation, through a
representative, that dailyrecord.co.uk breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the
Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Teen girl 'passes out' in
doorway after nightclub sells her ten 75p Jagerbombs”, published on 30 July
2021.
2. The
online article reported that “the distressed mum of the 16-year-old girl […]
slammed a nightclub after it sold her underage daughter ten Jagerbombs, causing
her to pass out.” It said that the mother “discovered her teenage daughter
‘passed out in the doorway’ of a nearby bingo hall after she spent a mere £7.50
on ten drinks in the space of an hour”. It stated that the child “entered [the]
nightclub on Monday, July, 19, with a group of friends, but became unwell after
drinking ten drinks”. The article included comments made by the mother to a
sister publication. The mother called on the nightclub to review its entry and
drinks policy as well as the local authority to take preventative action. The
article also included a response from the complainant, the club’s manager, who
made clear that the venue was “deeply concerned about this story”, did “not
encourage excessive drinking” and that its staff were “trained to serve responsibility”.
It made clear that the club would “investigate matters fully” and “cooperate
fully with police and offer a review of [its] CCTV to figure out what has
happened.” The article also included comments made by a local councillor,
responsible for public services and communities, who said that the council
would “work closely with the police to ensure compliance with licensing
legislation and will follow up on any reports of under-age drinking”, adding
that “if concerns are raised”, the council would “respond and take enforcement
action if necessary”.
3. The
complainant said that the article was inaccurate, in breach of Clause 1
(Accuracy). He said that the reported incident had never occurred; there was no
evidence that the underage girl had entered the venue or been sold alcohol. He
also denied that the family member quoted existed. He said that the article’s
publication had been seriously damaging to the reputation and finances of the
business.
4. The
newspaper said that the article had been based upon a press release. Upon
receipt of this, its sister publication had contacted the following subjects
for comment: the family member; the complainant (as the manager of the venue);
the local council; and the police. It maintained that the article accurately
reported the allegations made by the family member, adding that the article
made clear the status of these allegations. It also noted that the article made
clear the venue’s position, and published the complainant’s comments as well as
the response provided by the local council.
5. Notwithstanding
this, following the article’s publication and upon receipt of further concerns
raised by the complainant after his review of the venue’s CCTV footage, its
sister publication returned to the family member for further comments and in
order to obtain a police reference number. When the family member did not
respond to this request, the sister publication contacted the police for a
public statement. Upon receipt of this, the publication then removed the online
article and published the following correction online. This included the
statement provided by the police to the sister publication and the
complainant’s denial in full, and appeared as a standalone item on the
newspaper’s website:
“In
regards to our story 'Girl, 16, 'passes out' in random doorway after Halifax
nightclub sells her ten 75p Jagerbombs,' 29 July, the owner of The Acapulco
Club, Simon Woodcock, has since advised that he is satisfied that there was no
record of the individual entering the club via their QR/ticketing system, and
that there was no-one on the CCTV matching the individual's description.
Furthermore, Mr Woodcock has advised that no footage of the individual was
found on the CCTV of the location where she was suggested to have been found.
YorkshireLive contacted the Police for comment, who stated that 'West Yorkshire
Police has not found any evidence to support the allegations made.’ We are
happy to make the above positions clear.
6. The
complainant, however, did not consider the actions taken by the publication
sufficient. The wording did not state unequivocally that the events described
did not happen, nor did it adequately address the financial consequences of the
article’s publication or include an apology.
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.
Findings
of the Committee
7. The
Committee was clear that a newspaper’s obligations under the Editors’ Code
extends to all editorial content it publishes, including material obtained from
sister publications, and that care should be taken to ensure that information
is not inaccurate, misleading, or distorted.
8. In
this instance, the allegations made by the mother against the complainant’s
establishment were serious, claiming that it had sold alcohol to a person under
the age of 18, potentially in breach of the law and licensing regulations.
While the Committee recognised the complainant’s concerns, it was not in a
position to reconcile the conflicting accounts, or to rule on the accuracy of
the claims made by the mother. Its role was to consider the presentation of the
claims made.
9. The
Committee noted that the headline and first few paragraphs of the article
stated, as fact, that the child was sold a specific amount of alcohol by the
complainant’s establishment without qualification or attribution. Although the
headline included quotation marks within the headline these appeared only
around the words “passes out” and not in relation to the venue’s sale of
alcohol. The headline contained the sole reference to the specific allegation
that the nightclub had sold her alcohol and nowhere in the body of the article
was it indicated that it was an allegation made by the person’s mother. By
presenting serious allegations about the conduct of a licensed establishment in
this way, the publication had not taken sufficient care over the accuracy of
the article in breach of Clause 1 (i) and Clause 1 (iv). The presentation of
these claims as fact was significant, where they related to serious allegations
that alcohol had been sold to someone under the age of 18. For this reason, the
newspaper was required to publish a clarification under the terms of Clause 1
(ii).
10.
While the Committee welcomed the steps taken by the publication when it was
notified by its sister publication that it was unable to obtain further
testimony from the mother following an additional enquiry with the police –
promptly removing the online article and publishing a correction item which
updated readers of the situation that included a statement provided by the
police and the complainant’s denial in full – the published wording did not
address how the article had misleadingly presented the claims made. For this
reason, there was a breach of Clause 1 (ii).
Conclusion(s)
11. The
complaint was upheld.
Remedial
Action Required
12.
Having upheld a breach of Clause 1, the Committee considered what remedial
action should be required. In circumstances where the Committee establishes a
breach of the Editors’ Code, it can require the publication of a correction
and/or adjudication, the terms and placement of which is determined by IPSO.
13. In
coming to a view on the appropriate remedy in this case, the Committee
considered the seriousness and extent of the breach of the Code. It also noted
the steps taken by the newspaper following publication, including the removal
of the online article and the publication of standalone correction. However,
this wording had not addressed that the article had misleadingly presented the
allegations as fact. As such, the appropriate remedy was the publication of a
clarification.
14. The
Committee then considered the placement of this clarification. This
clarification should appear as a standalone clarification in the online
Corrections and Clarification’s column. The wording of this clarification should
be agreed with IPSO in advance and should make clear that it had been published
following an upheld ruling by the Independent Press Standards Organisation.
Date
complaint received: 07/09/2021
Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 12/07/2022
Back to ruling listing