Remedy – 10512-22 Bavister v cornwalllive.com
Bavister complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that
cornwalllive.com breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice
in a Facebook post, published on 10 July 2022.
material in question was an image published on Facebook. It consisted of text
on a coloured background which read: “Dog’s don’t just die in hot cars – they
can die from a walk in the sun on a day like today. The RSPCA advises against
walking your dog in temperatures of 22C or over”.
complainant said that the article was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1 as the
RSPCA had not given the advice published in the post.
publication accepted that the RSPCA had not advised against walking your dog in
temperatures of 22C or over. The day the publication was made aware of the
complaint it deleted the post and published the following as a separate
your dog in high temperatures: we previously stated walking dogs when the
temperature is 22 degrees or above was advised against by the RSPCA. Although
the RSPCA clearly recommends avoiding walking your dog in the hottest parts of
the day, advice on specific temperatures comes from The Kennel Club Pet
Insurance which says anything above 20C can cause your dog to become dehydrated
and very hot very quickly, and "any temperature over 25C is a definite NO
when it comes to walking." We are happy to clarify this.
complainant did not accept the proposal as a resolution to the complaint as he
did not think that the damage caused by the original article could be undone
and thought it would be necessary to pursue financial sanctions against the
newspaper. He said his complaint could not be resolved.
Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted
information or images, including headlines not supported by the text.
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
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.
publication must report fairly and accurately the outcome of an action for
defamation to which it has been a party, unless an agreed settlement states
otherwise, or an agreed statement is published.
publication requested that IPSO consider whether the remedial measures it had
offered to the complainant amounted to a satisfactory resolution of the
complaint such that, subject to fulfilment of the offer, the complaint could be
Committee noted that the publication had deleted the original Facebook post. It
had also published a correction on Facebook, which acknowledged the original
inaccuracy and put the correct position on record. As a post on the newspaper’s
Facebook profile, the correction was of due prominence. Where it was published
on the same day the publication received the complaint, this represented due
line with the provisions in Regulation 40 of IPSO’s Regulations; having taken
into account the nature of the complaint and the publication’s remedial actions
in response, the Committee concluded that the remedial measures offered by the
publication were a satisfactory resolution of the complaint and, as the
correction had already been published, the complaint would be closed.
complaint received: 16/07/2022
Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 09/09/2022Back to ruling listing