IPSO established a breach of the Editors’ Code and has
required The Daily Telegraph to publish this decision as a remedy. (IPSO appears not to have required an apology of any sort, because none appears.)
The article reported the contents of a leaked Government
memorandum which claimed that at a private meeting the First Minister, Nicola
Sturgeon MSP, had told the French Ambassador that she would rather see David
Cameron win the general election than Ed Miliband. The memorandum had been
written by a senior British civil servant a week later, after a conversation
with the French Consul-General.
The article said that these comments undermined Ms
Sturgeon’s public support for a “progressive alliance” with Mr Miliband.
The complainant said that the claims were categorically
untrue: Ms Sturgeon had not expressed a preference for a Conservative
government or any views about Mr Miliband’s suitability as Prime Minister. The
complainant regarded the newspaper’s decision not to contact Ms Sturgeon for
comment prior to publication as a breach of Clause 1.
The newspaper said it had confirmed the authenticity of the
document with two well-placed sources before publication. (Both of whom, it appears, either misunderstood what had been said or lied, so Telegraph, beware in the future. Politicians and their staff, in danger of being parted from their expenses, and cushie numbers are inclined to be economical with the truth!)
It was a
contemporaneous note made by an experienced civil servant, and the newspaper
had no reason to doubt its accuracy. (Except that it was wrong adn if they had just asked someone else for confirmation they would have found that out. However, that would have ruined a superb chance of undermining the SNP.)
It denied having any obligation to contact
Ms Sturgeon for comment before publication: it was entitled to publish an
accurate account of the document. (It might not have had an obligation to ask Ms Sturgeon for a comment, although clearly both good manners and sensible journalism would have indicated the wisdom in so-doing and obviated the need for the later climb down.)
The Complaints Committee noted that the memorandum
represented – at best – a second-hand account given a week after the meeting,
which contained the serious implication that Ms Sturgeon had been disingenuous
in her public statements.
The newspaper did not know whether the account contained in
the memorandum was accurate. Nonetheless, it had published this as fact,
without having taken additional steps prior to publication – such as contacting
the parties involved for their comment – to verify its accuracy. (Given that one of the parties was the First Minister of Scotland, the other was the Ambassador of the French Republic to the Court of St James, and that there was a General Election campaign under way, it would probably have been prudent to check that this wasn't a dirty political trick...as indeed it turned out to have been.)
The committee established that the newspaper’s presentation
of the account contained in the memorandum, in this context, represented a
breach of the Editors’ Code.
(The Daily Telegraph was always a solidly Conservative supporting newspaper. It's editorials were strongly Tory friendly. But until the mad twins, who don't live in the UK, took it over, it was an excellent paper for all that. Conrad Black may have been a crook and a fraudster, but he ran a tight ship. Now it is as ridiculous as the tabloid Daily Mail or Express. Its content is dumbed down and the standard of journalism is abysmal. Small wonder its circulation is falling like a stone.
Even Carmichael, the disgraced former Scottish Secretary apologised to Nicola for his part in what was clearly a pre-election slur on the SNP and on Nicola. It's a pity that the Barclay Twins couldn't manage even that meagre level of good grace. Clearly infinite amounts of money cannot buy manners.)
I wrote this last night, since when Wings has written an altogether better piece on the subject to which I direct you.
I wrote this last night, since when Wings has written an altogether better piece on the subject to which I direct you.
