Resolution Statement – 04887-24 Wilton v cornwalllive.com
-
Complaint Summary
Chris Wilton complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that cornwalllive.com breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Farmer removes iconic ponies from beauty spot because he didn’t get permission for new house”, published on 26 July 2024.
-
-
Published date
23rd January 2025
-
Outcome
Resolved - IPSO mediation
-
Code provisions
1 Accuracy
-
Published date
Summary of Complaint
1. Chris Wilton complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that cornwalllive.com breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Farmer removes iconic ponies from beauty spot because he didn’t get permission for new house”, published on 26 July 2024.
2. The article reported that the complainant, a farmer, had removed a flock of 16 Dartmoor ponies from the Rame Head peninsula grazing site. It referred to the complainant as a “tenant farmer” and reported that he had “removed the iconic grazing ponies from a popular beauty spot because he was refused planning permission for a house at a prominent site. Chris Wilton said he does not have the facilities and people required to look after the ponies as a result of his development plans being turned down”.
3. The complainant said the article was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1 where it reported that he had removed the ponies because he was refused planning permission for a house. The Complainant said that this was inaccurate, as the ponies had in fact been removed because the Higher Level Stewardship Agreement with Natural England, which permitted pony grazing on the land, ended in October 2023. He said there was no connection between the plan to build a home and the removal of the ponies.
4. The Complainant also said the article was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1 (Accuracy) where it stated that he was a “tenant farmer” on the site, and that he had removed the ponies. The Complainant said that this was inaccurate because his father was the tenant farmer on the site.
5. In its first response to the complainant after being made aware of his concerns, the publication offered to amend the headline of the article to “Iconic ponies removed from beauty spot” and to add the following clarifications to the article:
A previous version of this article stated that Mr Chris Wilton moved 16 Dartmoor ponies from his acreage. We have been asked to clarify that the land on Rame Head, where the ponies grazed, is instead farmed by Mr Wilton’s father, and that it was the farming partnership of the two men which removed the ponies from the site, rather than Mr Wilton personally. The article has been amended accordingly.
The complainant did not accept the publication’s offer of a resolution. He considered it did not sufficiently correct the headline or text of the article, which still stated that the ponies were removed because his planning application to build a house on the site had been refused. The complainant said the correction did not reflect the correct position: that the ponies had been removed because the agreement with Natural England had ended.
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
6. The complaint was not resolved through direct correspondence between the parties. IPSO therefore began an investigation into the matter.
7. During IPSO’s investigation the publication offered to publish the following correction beneath the headline:
A previous version of this article stated that Mr Chris Wilton moved 16 Dartmoor ponies from his acreage. We have been asked to clarify that the land on Rame Head, where the ponies grazed, is not tenanted by Chris Wilton, but rather his father, and that it was the tenant who removed the ponies from the site in accordance with the SSSI rules, rather than Mr Chris Wilton. The article has been amended accordingly.
8. The publication also offered to remove a ban from commenting on its Facebook posts.
9. The complainant said that this would resolve the matter to his satisfaction.
10. 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: 05/08/2024
Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 13/12/2024