The press regulator just ruled that a story by The Times was essentially b*llocks

The front page of a Times article which the press regulator called a distortion
Support us and go ad-free

The press regulator has just ruled that a controversial story by The Times was a “distortion” of real events, finding it had breached two pieces of the regulator’s code of practice.

The case

The Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) was passing judgement on a story [paywall] The Times ran on 30 August 2017. As The Guardian reported:

The Times reported that a ‘white Christian child’ had been left distressed after being placed with two Muslim households in Tower Hamlets over a period of six months…

The furore surrounding child AB, as she was known in court documents, was prompted by a front-page article in the Times headlined ‘Christian child forced into Muslim foster care’ on 28 August.

According to confidential local authority reports, a social services supervisor had described the child crying, asking not to be returned to one foster carer because ‘they don’t speak English’.

The complaint

But Tower Hamlets Council, the local authority at the centre of the case, reported The Times to IPSO for breaches of accuracy. It said that the article claimed:

  • That the judge had ruled the child “must leave Muslim foster home”.
  • The judge had praised the newspaper for “exposing council’s failure”.
  • That “the judge ordered the council to conduct an urgent investigation into issues reported by The Times”.
  • The child “should not remain in the placement organised by Tower Hamlets”.

Also, Tower Hamlets claimed that the article did not make clear that it had actually applied for the child to live with her grandmother. Tower Hamlets claimed all these points were inaccurate.

Read on...

Support us and go ad-free

The Times: ‘distorting’ the facts

IPSO agreed, saying the story was a “distortion” of events. Its ruling said that none of it was “what the court decided, or an implication of what the court had decided”. IPSO found that The Times:

Had failed to take care not to publish distorted information, in breach of Clause 1 (i). The newspaper made no proposals to correct this distortion, in breach of Clause 1 (ii).

Two other complaints from Tower Hamlets Council were not upheld. But beyond the official complaints, many people believed there were Islamophobic undertones in The Times‘s reporting:

The Times noted the IPSO ruling on its front page on Wednesday 25 April, and put the full ruling [paywall] on page two of its print edition and online. But this is not the first time IPSO has ruled that a Rupert Murdoch paper has breached its standards.

Previous breaches

As The Canary previously reported, there was controversy over a Sunday Times headline which stated that “Asians make up 80% of child groomers”. IPSO found this to have breached its accuracy guidelines, as:

The study had not found that 80% of people convicted of child-grooming offences were Asian; its findings related to a specific sub-set of these offences. The research was available to the newspaper prior to publication.

The UK media: institutional Islamophobia?

In October 2016, the European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) – part of the Council of Europe – said that the the fuelling of prejudice against Muslims “showed a reckless disregard… for their safety”. It criticised Murdoch’s Sun for its “inflammatory anti-Muslim headlines”, such as this:

A front page from The Sun

But it appears that this report, and subsequent breaches of IPSO standards, have had little impact on Murdoch’s papers. Just this week, The Sun‘s managing editor said he didn’t believe Islamophobia “is an issue” in the “mainstream media”.

He must be reading a different mainstream media from the rest of us.

Get Involved!

Join The Canary so we can keep holding the powerful to account.

Featured image via The Times – screengrab

Support us and go ad-free

We need your help to keep speaking the truth

Every story that you have come to us with; each injustice you have asked us to investigate; every campaign we have fought; each of your unheard voices we amplified; we do this for you. We are making a difference on your behalf.

Our fight is your fight. You’ve supported our collective struggle every time you gave us a like; and every time you shared our work across social media. Now we need you to support us with a monthly donation.

We have published nearly 2,000 articles and over 50 films in 2021. And we want to do this and more in 2022 but we don’t have enough money to go on at this pace. So, if you value our work and want us to continue then please join us and be part of The Canary family.

In return, you get:

* Advert free reading experience
* Quarterly group video call with the Editor-in-Chief
* Behind the scenes monthly e-newsletter
* 20% discount in our shop

Almost all of our spending goes to the people who make The Canary’s content. So your contribution directly supports our writers and enables us to continue to do what we do: speaking truth, powered by you. We have weathered many attempts to shut us down and silence our vital opposition to an increasingly fascist government and right-wing mainstream media.

With your help we can continue:

* Holding political and state power to account
* Advocating for the people the system marginalises
* Being a media outlet that upholds the highest standards
* Campaigning on the issues others won’t
* Putting your lives central to everything we do

We are a drop of truth in an ocean of deceit. But we can’t do this without your support. So please, can you help us continue the fight?

The Canary Support us

Comments are closed