Resolution
Statement 14428-17 English Democrats v Metro.co.uk
Summary
of Complaint
1.
The English Democrats complained to the Independent Press Standards
Organisation that metro.co.uk breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) and Clause 12
(Discrimination) of the Editors’ Code of Practice, in an article headlined
“Here are the far-right extremist groups spreading hate in Britain” published
on 14 September 2017.
2.
The article reported that there was a resurgence of “violent racism” and
“neo-Nazism” across the world. It profiled several “far-right” groups within
the UK, and listed English Democrats as one. The article stated that the
English Democrats were “a nationalist political party campaigning on
Islamophobic policies” and stated that “the group has been posting photos of
Aung San Suu Kyi on its Facebook page in support of the ethnic cleansing carried
out against Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar.”
3.
The complainant said that it was inaccurate to refer to the English Democrats
as “far right,” as the party is primarily a nationalist party, campaigning for
English Independence. As such, they did not believe they could be placed on the
traditional left/right political spectrum. They also raised concern that
references to “neo Nazis” in the article implied that they shared these
beliefs. They also said that the post on social media relating to Myanmar had
been posted by a party member, and did not indicate that the party supported
any possible ethnic cleansing in Burma. The complainant also said that it had
not been confirmed that ethnic cleansing was taking place in Burma, and
therefore it was inaccurate for the article to use this term.
4.
They also said it was inaccurate to state that they campaigned on “Islamophobic”
policies. The complainant said that the term “Islamophobic” had been created to
impede justifiable criticism of Islam. The complainant said that the main focus
of their policies was integration and stated that they were opposed to
multi-culturalism.
5.
The complainant also raised concern that the article breached Clause 12
(Discrimination), as they believed it discriminated against individuals of
English national identity.
6.
The publication did not accept that it had breached the Code. It said that the
position of political groups or parties on a left/right spectrum was inevitably
a matter of debate which was inherently subjective, and provided a number of
examples of activities and speeches associated with the complainant which it
said supported its characterisation of the party as “far right.” It also said
that at no point did the article equate the complainant with “neo Nazis.”
7.
The publication provided sections of the party’s manifesto which it said could
be reasonably characterised as “Islamophobic,” defined by the Oxford English
Dictionary as “hostility or prejudice towards Muslims.” It said that given the
evidence, it was reasonable to characterise the removal of Rohingya Muslims in
Myanmar as “ethnic cleansing”, and as the Facebook posted referenced in the
article supported the country’s leader in her denial about the nature of the
operation, it was also reasonable to characterise this as support for these
actions.
Relevant Code Provisions
8.
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.
Clause
12 (Discrimination)
i)
The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s,
race, colour, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation or to any
physical or mental illness or disability.
ii)
Details of an individual’s race, colour, religion, gender identity, sexual
orientation, physical or mental illness or disability must be avoided unless
genuinely relevant to the story.
Mediated
outcome
9.
The complaint was not resolved through direct correspondence between the
parties. IPSO therefore began an investigation into the matter.
10.
Following IPSO’s intervention, the newspaper offered to publish the following
clarification, as a footnote to the article:
Following
publication of this article which included the English Democrats in a list of
‘far right’ organisations, Robin Tilbrook, the leader of the Party, has asked
us to make clear that they consider themselves to be modern democratic English
nationalists and have the slogan ‘Not Right not Left, just English!
11.
The complainant said that this would resolve the matter to their satisfaction.
12.
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: 09/10/2017
Date
complaint concluded by IPSO: 23/11/2017