Resolution Statement – 04593-24 Smith v express.co.uk

Summary of Complaint

1. Barry Smith complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that express.co.uk breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “'Ugly face' of the Lib Dems unmasked as Tory sounds alarm over disturbing attacks”, published on 3 July 2024.

2. The article appeared under the sub-headline: “A Liberal Democrat has been accused of running an anonymous social media account to launch a brutal smear campaign against a former Tory MP”. It opened by reporting: “Sir Ed Davey is under pressure to take action against a Lib Dem member after relentless online trolling and abuse of a former Tory MP was exposed.”

3. Subsequently, it reported: “An investigation reported an anonymous social media account @HammondWatch, which regularly launches attacks on Mr [Stephen] Hammond but has been suspended for the election campaign, was being run by former Lib Dem council candidate and prominent activist Barry Smith”.

4. The article also reported a comment from Mr Hammond, given to a separate publication:

“Set up days after the 2019 General Election, I’ve often pondered who’s behind @HammondWatch, a page immediately followed by [a named individual] which has consistently hounded and trolled me and been dedicated to making false accusations and slurs on my integrity.

“It is run by Barry Smith, a friend of [a named individual], partner of a Lib Dem Councillor, and a committed Lib Dem activist and former candidate. This is the ugly face of Wimbledon’s Liberal Democrats. I await an apology from Mr Smith, and confirmation he has been thrown out of the Lib Dem party.”

5. The complainant, the owner of the @HammondWatch account, said that the article was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1 because it accused him of “relentless online trolling and abuse”. He stated that he had never published anything of this description, and that the article did not provide any posts of his as evidence.

6. The complainant also stated that the article failed to distinguish between comment, conjecture and fact, as required by the Editors’ Code. He said that, although the article went on to report Mr Hammond’s view that he had been abusing him via the account, the following line – “Sir Ed Davey is under pressure to take action against a Lib Dem member after relentless online trolling and abuse of a former Tory MP was exposed” – was reported as fact, and was not qualified as Mr Hammond’s view.

7. On 19 August, IPSO made the publication aware that the article represented a possible breach of the Code. On 4 September, the publication contacted the complainant. It stated that, to resolve the complaint, it was happy to remove the online article.

8. The complainant did not accept the publication’s offer of resolution. While he welcomed the offer to remove the article, he requested an apology, or an acknowledgment from the newspaper that the accusation it had reported was “false”. He said people had used the article to “attack” him, and he would like a correction to be published that he could point to in response.

Relevant Clause 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

9. The complaint was not resolved through direct correspondence between the parties. IPSO therefore began an investigation into the matter.

10. During IPSO’s investigation, on 27 September, the publication offered to remove the online article, and print the following standalone correction:

“In an article entitled “'Ugly face' of the Lib Dems unmasked as Tory sounds alarm over disturbing attacks” published on 3 July 2024, we stated that the X account @HammondWatch conducted “relentless online trolling and abuse” of former Tory MP Stephen Hammond. We would like to clarify that, while the account did level constant criticism at Mr Hammond, this did not amount to ‘relentless online trolling and abuse.’ We are happy to set the record straight.”

11. The complainant said that this would resolve the matter to his satisfaction, and on the same day, the publication removed the online article and published the agreed correction.

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: 08/07/2024

Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 27/09/2024