Resolution Statement – 06045-24 Aston v The Times Scotland
-
Complaint Summary
Jacki Aston complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that The Times Scotland breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Ban for neighbours after hate campaign”, published on 25 October 2024.
-
-
Published date
23rd January 2025
-
Outcome
Resolved - IPSO mediation
-
Code provisions
1 Accuracy
-
Published date
Summary of Complaint
1. Jacki Aston complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that The Times Scotland breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Ban for neighbours after hate campaign”, published on 25 October 2024.
2. The article – which appeared on page 11 – was a court report which reported on a couple who were found guilty of causing three sets of neighbours fear and alarm between October 2018 and October 2021. The article said that “[a]fter employers became aware of [the complainant’s] conviction, she lost her care-home job.”
3. The article also appeared online in substantially the same format under the headline “’Nightmare’ neighbours banned from town after harassment campaign”.
4. The complainant said that the article was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1 as it reported she had lost her job. She said she had resigned from her job and provided documentation to support her position.
5. On 8 November, the publication confirmed it had removed the reference under complaint and said it would publish a correction. On 9 November it published the following print correction:
“We wrongly said that Jacqueline Aston “lost her job” at a care home after was found guilty of three charges of stalking (news,, Oct 25). She resigned of her own volition.”
6. The complainant said she had not been contacted by the publication during direct correspondence.
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
7. The complaint was not resolved through direct correspondence between the parties. IPSO therefore began an investigation into the matter.
8. During IPSO’s investigation the publication confirmed it had contacted the complainant on 8 November and published a correction
9. The complainant said that this would resolve the matter to her 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: 01/11/2024
Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 18/12/2024