Thread by @ShoaibMKhan

Judge rules that a "native English-speaking girl from a Christian family" should be removed from her practising-Muslim foster family.

Following points are in the court order, but do not seem to appear in the news reports about the case. Eg. child's grandparents are Muslim.

So @IpsoNews has now ruled that @thetimes front page story about a child made to leave Muslim foster parents was inaccurate and breached the Editor's Code.

Good to see the ruling referred to on the front page.

Even if it is a *bit* smaller than the original, inaccurate story...

A thread now, mainly about Ipso, on @thetimes being made to publish an @IpsoNews ruling that its frontpage story about a child with Muslim foster parents was inaccurate.

Firstly, well-done to Tower Hamlets Council for complaining and pursuing the complaint to completion.

(1/n)

Good to see Ipso took the complaint seriously and forced The Times to not only publish the ruling but also publish a reference to it on the front page.

*But*, @IPSONews decision-making and processes have to be reviewed and improved.

(2/n)

1: Story published in Aug 2017. Ruling published in Apr 2018, 8 months later. This delay is unacceptable for several reasons. In this time, the inaccurate front page has already been read and believed by millions. It has been cited widely and become part of public record.

(3/n)

Tabloids, foreign media, researchers are already using the front page as evidence of something that happened. A ruling hidden inside newspaper eight months later is not going to change that. Ipso must look into why the process takes so long & how delays can be minimised.

(4/n)

2: Times ran 4 front pages on this story. Now that it has been found to be inaccurate, they should publish ruling on front page, rather than tiny reference to it on bottom corner of front page, and actual ruling hidden. Surely ruling merits one or even half of front page.

(5/n)

3 - 170 complaints about this. Ipso dismissed all but one. That one led to this ruling. No sensible reason others were dismissed. When comes to the accuracy, anyone can/should be able to complain. A story isn't inaccurate only if the subject of the story complains himself.

(6/n)

Many individuals/groups cannot complain, for many reasons. Another council may not have complained in this case - for reasons of politics or resources or not wishing to waste time. Anyone should be able to complain about inaccuracy, and complaint should be decided properly.

7/n

4: Ipso should require, and Times should publish, an apology. There were individuals and teams adversely affected by inaccurate story. It called into question their integrity and competence, and the system itself. The least these individuals and teams deserve is an apology.

8/n

But, great to see this ruling. Even if it should have been published sooner. And more prominently. And included an apology. And it shouldn't have been only Tower Hamlets that was allowed to complain about this article.

So, good work @IpsoNews but could do better.

/Ends

Yes. Seems @mckinneytweets is correct here. So @IpsoNews didn't even require a reference on the front page at all then. Good on @thetimes for seeing sense itself. Maybe Ispo needs to rethink whether a page 6 ruling would have been proportionate here.

External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @mckinneytweets view original on Twitter