Resolution
Statement – 28519-20 Clark v Northern Scot
Summary
of Complaint
1. Niall
Clark complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that the
Northern Scot breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in
an article headlined “Scottish veterans railcard welcomed by Moray MSP Richard
Lochhead”, published on 15 October 2020.
2. The
article reported that a new railcard had been launched in Scotland for veterans
and stated that the Scottish Government was “also funding a further discount
scheme” to encourage uptake.
3. The
complainant said that the article was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1
(Accuracy) as it implied that the Veterans Railcard was an initiative by the
devolved Scottish Government, rather than being part of a UK-wide
initiative.
4. The
publication did not accept that the article breached the Code, as it did not
consider that the alleged inaccuracy identified by the complainant was
significantly inaccurate or misleading. The publication said that transport was
a devolved matter and that the railcard, in the format issued in Scotland, was
introduced by the Scottish Government. It added that the information included
in the article had been based upon a press release by the Scottish Government
and published in good faith.
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
5. The
complaint was not resolved through direct correspondence between the parties.
IPSO therefore began an investigation into the matter.
6. During
IPSO’s investigation the publication offered to publish the following footnote
clarification to the online article:
“A previous version of this article did not make clear that the Veterans Railcard was a UK-wide initiative, with the Scottish Government funding the discount scheme discussed to encourage its uptake. We are happy to clarify this.”
7. This
proposal was rejected by the complainant. The publication then offered to
publish a new online article, clarifying that the Veterans Railcard was a
UK-wide initiative. This article also included the following clarification
footnote:
“An
online story published in October did not make it clear this was a UK
Government initiative. We are happy to clarify that position.”
8. The
complainant said that this would resolve the matter to his 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: 15/10/2020
Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 09/12/2020
Back to ruling listing