Showing posts with label apology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label apology. Show all posts

Wednesday, 1 May 2013

Scottish Mail apologises over asylum claims

The Scottish Daily Mail has published the following correction and apology, after a complaint from the Scottish Refugee Council:

In an article on January 25, 2013, headlined: "Crisis as Asylum Seekers target Scotland" we stated that asylum seekers were ‘targeting' Scotland. We now accept that asylum seekers are dispersed by the UK Border Agency on a ‘no choice' basis and would not be able to choose to live in Scotland. With the current rate of asylum applicants to the UK well within the average rate of the past ten years, we also accept that it is misleading to categorise this as a ‘crisis'. We are happy to clarify the position and apologise for the error.

According to the PCC:

The newspaper also agreed to: publish an article regarding the work of the Scottish Refugee Council; hold a meeting with the organisation; and inform editorial staff of the issues and concerns raised at the meeting.

Wednesday, 10 April 2013

The Sun's prison/hospital confusion

An apology published by The Sun:
In an article ‘Real life Mr Bump has had 34 ops’ (11 January) a picture caption mistakenly said that Mr Terry Butler had been ‘in prison’ for 15 months instead of ‘in hospital’.

We apologise to Mr Butler and regret any distress caused.

Monday, 25 March 2013

Mail apologises to Sir Roger Moore for repeating false claims first published in The People

On 20 January, The People published the following apology to Sir Roger Moore:

On 16 September we published an article headed “I’ve had Moore women than James Bond” which claimed that Sir Roger Moore had recently spoken exclusively to The People and made comments to our journalist about his private life.

We now accept that Sir Roger did not give an interview to our reporter and did not make the comments that were reported in the headline.

We apologise for any distress and embarrassment our article has caused to Sir Roger Moore and we have agreed to pay him damages and legal costs.

Two months later and the Mail, which appears to have simply copied-and-pasted the claims, has also apologised:

An article on September 17 (‘I’ve had more lovers than 007’) included comments attributed to Sir Roger Moore by a Sunday newspaper about his private life.

That newspaper has now accepted its report did not accurately reflect a conversation with Sir Roger Moore and he did not make the comments it reported.

We apologise for any distress and embarrassment caused.

Thursday, 14 March 2013

The Sun vs Gordon Brown (cont.)

This apology to Gordon Brown appeared in today's Sun:

In Trevor Kavanagh’s column of 12 November, it was stated that Gordon Brown accused The Sun of blagging his son’s medical records. In fact, Mr Brown has never made such an accusation, in Parliament or otherwise. We were wrong to use this erroneous allegation as a basis to make comments about his character and integrity and to suggest that Mr Brown was ‘not telling the full story’. We withdraw these criticisms and apologise to Mr Brown.

This is the fifth time that the paper has corrected claims about Brown in less than five months.

Friday, 8 March 2013

Mail on Sunday apologises for smoking claim

Mail on Sunday, 27 January 2013:

E-cigarettes ‘can cause more harm than smoking’, experts say

They are billed as a healthier alternative to smoking, yet experts now warn that electronic cigarettes may be more damaging than the habit they replace.

Mail on Sunday, 3 March 2013:

A Health article on January 27 said some experts believe electronic cigarettes can be more harmful than real ones. In fact we are not aware of any experts who hold this view compared to the risks of cancer, heart disease and lung damage from real cigarettes. We apologise for any contrary suggestion.

(More info on the complaint to the PCC that led to this apology can be found here.)

Monday, 4 March 2013

Mail apologises to Christine Hamilton

An apology in today's Mail reads:

A recent reader's letter wrongly compared a 2003 driving offence for which Christine Hamilton was acquitted with the more serious offence of perverting the course of justice to which Chris Huhne has pleaded guilty. It also wrongly accused Mrs Hamilton of wrongdoing in connection with a driving offence while working for Sir Gerald Nabarro in 1971, when in fact she did not work for him at the time and was not involved. We apologise for any distress caused.

Compare that with this letter, which challenged one of the Mail's incorrect EU stories and which they refused to print.

Friday, 15 February 2013

Mail corrects Littlejohn column

The 'Clarifications and corrections' column in today's Mail includes this:

A recent column said that EU regulations prevent the Women’s Institute from selling jam in re-used jars. In fact the rules apply only to commercial food businesses.

The 'recent column' was written by Richard Littlejohn and was mentioned on this blog on Tuesday.

This correction was published (at time of writing) ten hours ago on the Mail's website. But they haven't bothered to edit the original column - the incorrect claim remains there, and this correction hasn't been added to article. It doesn't appear anywhere on today's Littlejohn column either, so his regular readers may not even realise this has been corrected.

Moreover, the original news article, which made the same false claims back in October, remains live on their website and has never been removed or edited or corrected.

In the circumstances, it might make sense if they acted in some way over the original and then apologised for giving their readers the same, untrue information twice.

Tuesday, 12 February 2013

Mail's apology to Duke of York

The Mail has published the following apology to the Duke of York:

Articles of 7 and 14 May 2012 said that the Duke of York had demanded a private plane, travelled in a chauffeur-driven Rolls-Royce and snubbed free accommodation for his official Diamond Jubilee visit to India. We now accept that the Duke had no personal involvement in the decision to charter the plane, did not travel in a Rolls, and that the British High Commissioner’s residence was deemed too small for his party on this occasion. We apologise to the Duke of York for the misunderstanding.

Friday, 8 February 2013

Mail apologises over swimming claims

Daily Mail, 22 September 2012:

Every medal won by the British Swimming team at the London Olympics cost a grand total of £8.4million each.

That's a hell of a price to pay, particularly when none of those lavishly funded gongs proved to be gold. The silver won by Michael Jamieson, plus Rebecca Adlington's two bronzes, were a truly grim return from £25,144,600 of public investment...

Did you know that Britain's swimming team are controlled by a chief executive living in Germany and a performance director based in Australia?

It's true. CEO David Sparkes and coaching supremo Michael Scott pop in and out of the country from their overseas homes.

The Mail, 6 February 2013:

British Swimming: A sports report on September 22, 2012, calculated that three medals won by the British team at the London Olympics had cost £8.4million each. In fact, the team's budget also funded diving, in which Tom Daley won a medal, and the Paralympic team, which won 39 medals. We also accept that David Sparkes, CEO of British Swimming, lives in the UK, not Germany, including for tax purposes, and apologise for any contrary impression given.

Wednesday, 6 February 2013

Mail on Sunday pays damages over fraud claims

Last Thursday, MediaGuardian reported:

A top banking executive has won a high court apology and £60,000 in libel damages plus £690,000 in costs from the Mail on Sunday, over articles that falsely implied he was at the heart of a criminal mortgage fraud.

Irfan Qadir, a former Bank of Scotland director, sued over libels in two Mail on Sunday articles in May and June 2011.

The apology was published by the Mail on Sunday a few days later:

An article ‘Bank of Scotland director “drove us out with dogs’’’ on May 8, 2011, reported allegations in a writ that in 2005, Irfan Qadir committed perjury and intimidated three businessmen, causing fear for their own and their families’ lives, to gain control of a nightclub. The article did not report Mr Qadir’s denial of the claims and wrongly alleged that he had declined to comment.

A further article, ‘Top banker named in mortgage fraud case’ on June 19, 2011, reported an allegation in a separate case that Mr Qadir centred in a £49million bank fraud. In fact, the judge in that case made it clear this was unsupported by evidence in the five-month trial, stating that Mr Qadir did not lend any money and the allegations in court should not have been made. We are no longer pursuing a defence that the allegations in the articles are true. We apologise to Mr Qadir for the distress and embarrassment caused and are paying substantial damages and legal costs.

'Element of choice'

On 27 January, the Mail on Sunday published the following apology:

The headline to an article last Sunday about a tragic road accident may have implied that Ben Brooks-Dutton had some element of choice about saving either his wife or son. We would like to clarify that there was no such choice and we apologise for any contrary suggestion.

Sunday, 20 January 2013

The People apologises for lying about Sir Roger Moore interview

Today, The People published an apology to Sir Roger Moore:

On 16 September we published an article headed “I’ve had Moore women than James Bond” which claimed that Sir Roger Moore had recently spoken exclusively to The People and made comments to our journalist about his private life.

We now accept that Sir Roger did not give an interview to our reporter and did not make the comments that were reported in the headline.

We apologise for any distress and embarrassment our article has caused to Sir Roger Moore and we have agreed to pay him damages and legal costs.

Tuesday, 20 November 2012

Sorry we said you were a soft-porn actress

The Mail has published this apology today:

Our serialisation of a biography of Mick Jagger in July erroneously described model and Brazilian TV presenter Luciana Gimenez Morad as a soft-porn actress. It also said that she had received a lump sum payment from the star after their son was born.

In fact, while she does receive monthly child support, she neither requested nor received a lump sum. We apologise to Ms Gimenez Morad.

Sunday, 4 November 2012

Mail on Sunday publishes second apology for front page splash

In June, the Mail on Sunday's Richard Dyson and Martin Delgado carried out an investigation into the website Yipiii. The results were splashed on the front page:


The paper claimed that their reporters had spent £162 on the website and:

only won a £19.99 fish bowl. 

And:

The reporters did not use the free plays they were offered.

A week later, they admitted that wasn't true:

In our front-page report last week we said Mail on Sunday reporters had spent £162 on Yipiii plays but won only a £20 toy goldfish bowl.

In fact, one reporter used ‘free plays’ acquired during the experiment and went on to win an iPad worth up to £400.

And in a different experiment another journalist spent £40 and won £35 of flowers and a £101 iPod Nano.

We apologise to Yipiii for not mentioning these.

Also, we said customers can top up their accounts as often as they like. In fact, top-ups are limited to £200 per day. 

Yes - the paper 'forgot' to mention the £500-worth of Apple goods it had won on the site.

Today, they have apologised again:

In a report (June 10) on the ‘winmarket’ Yipiii Ltd, which offers a roulette game to win online shopping, we said we had 162 £1 plays but won only a £20 toy.

In fact, the 162 plays included ‘free spins’ won on previous plays and after our test, but before publication, a reporter won a £400 iPad with remaining credit. Players have an 85 per cent chance of a prize or further play and non-winning stakes can be used as discounts on purchases through the site.

Users need to actively log in for the roulette wheel to appear when they are shopping. We apologise to Yipiii for not including this information in the article.

Unlike the original 'investigation', neither apology has appeared on the front page. 

Friday, 5 October 2012

Sun pays damages over 'cougar' claim

On 23 July, this story appeared under the headline 'Harry and cougar No 3' in Gordon Smart's Bizarre column in The Sun:

HARRY STYLES is a creature of habit - he's charmed another blonde cougar called CAROLINE who works in telly.

The ONE DIRECTION star kissed and flirted with roving ITV reporter CAROLINE WHITMORE when she interviewed them at the weekend.

They couldn't stop giggling over Harry's soft spot for Carolines who work for the station - as it's just four months since he split from ITV2 host CAROLINE FLACK.

The rest of the lads repeatedly joked it wasn't the first time the pair had got together as Caroline has reported from his home village of Holmes Chapel in Cheshire. A source said: "Harry was the only one of the boys to kiss her - and he did it twice.

"That started the rest of the boys teasing him in front of her saying things like, 'Ooh - a kiss for Caroline. It wouldn't be the first time'.

"Harry tried to brush it off but the lads kept teasing them and making funny noises and dropping hints they were an item."

Harry - who performed at Party in Leeds yesterday, right - didn't do too much to calm his bandmates.

He turned to Caroline during the chat for Liverpool's Radio City Live and winked: "Don't I recognise you from somewhere?"

Caroline said after the Saturday night interview: "He was very sweet. He was the only one to kiss me and twice! He did blush."

One of her pals messaged her on Twitter: "Harry's grown up from when I met him in 'your' studio a couple of years back - eek!"

It is unlikely Caroline's husband STEVE WHITMORE will be too happy she's gushing over Harry. Caroline wed Steve in 2010 and has been with him 17 years - almost as long as 18-year-old Harry has been alive.

And although Harry likes his older ladies - before dating Caroline Flack, he had a fling with married radio DJ LUCY HOROBIN, 32 - I'm sure he'd draw the line at the Granada girl in her panto gear as a crone, inset above.

Flirting with 1D can prove dangerous for women in serious relationships. RUTH HICKS revealed she was dumped by her fiancé after he spotted photos of her giggling with NIALL HORAN.

I'm sure Caroline's husband will be be more understanding.

On 25 September, the Sun published this apology:

CAROLINE WHITMORE

In July, we reported how ITV's Caroline Whitmore interviewed One Direction with the usual round of showbiz pecks on the cheek for Caroline from all the lads, including Harry Styles.

There was nothing more to it than that and we apologise to Caroline for any suggestion to the contrary. 

In the original, the Sun didn't report 'all the lads kissed her'. It is also very doubtful that 'kissed and flirted' is a normal way of describing the 'usual round of showbiz pecks on the cheek'.

Yesterday, it was reported that Whitmore had accepted an apology, damages and payment of her legal costs from The Sun. Whitmore's solicitor said:

"The Sun has stated that the article was intended as light hearted. However, some readers seemingly understood that in referring to Mrs Whitmore as a 'cougar' and linking her to Mr Styles, the newspaper was seeking to suggest she had behaved inappropriately by pursuing a relationship with a considerably younger man, notwithstanding her being a married woman.

"The Sun has stated that no such meaning was intended. Such reading was particularly damaging and distressing to Mrs Whitmore, since she has been with her husband for 17 years and married for the last two.

"The article has also been repeated and expanded upon widely by the worldwide media. As a result, Mrs Whitmore has been the subject of abuse on the internet, including on her Twitter page."

Mirror apologises for 'drug treatment' claims

The Mirror has published this apology to the Earl of Cardigan:

Following Gavin Martin’s music column in our edition of August 17 concerning Bo Bruce, the daughter of the Earl of Cardigan, we would like to make clear that the Earl of Cardigan has never been treated himself in relation to any drug or alcohol problem. We also incorrectly stated that the Earl had checked himself into the same facility that Bo Bruce was treated at and married a nurse who was working there. The Earl’s wife has never been a nurse and we apologize for these errors.

Thursday, 9 August 2012

Express and Mirror apologise for photo error

The Express and Mirror have apologised for publishing photos of the Dutch dressage team, rather than the gold medal winners from Team GB, yesterday.

The Mirror says:

In yesterday's Daily Mirror newspaper a picture captioned Great Britain's gold medal winning dressage team was in fact of the Dutch bronze medal trio.

We apologise for the mistaken use of the picture, which was supplied by a normally reputable agency.

The Express has published an article about dressage - 'the sport riding high' - which ends with:

Due to a caption error by a picture agency, some editions of yesterday’s Daily Express showed a photograph of the bronze medal-winning Dutch dressage team instead of the victorious British dressage team. We sincerely apologise for the error.

Friday, 6 July 2012

Sorry we said you were a convicted drug dealer

Associated Newspapers in Ireland has apologised after articles in the Irish versions of the Mail and Mail on Sunday falsely accused someone of being a 'convicted drug dealer'. The Independent in Ireland reports:

A businessman who was falsely referred to as a convicted drugs dealer in newspaper reports about the funeral of RTE broadcaster Gerry Ryan has received a High Court apology.

Associated Newspapers (Irl) Ltd, publishers of the Mail titles, unreservedly apologised to Aidan Cosgrave for the injury to his reputation and for the distress and embarrassment caused to him.

The apology stated Mr Cosgrave is not a convicted drug dealer and has never dealt in drugs.

Mr Cosgrave (55) of Londonbridge Road, Sandymount, Dublin, took the action after the Irish Mail on Sunday and the Irish Daily Mail published reports on December 12 and 13, 2010, about the funeral of the RTE broadcaster.

One of the reports was headed "Convicted drugs dealer was at Gerry's funeral".

The articles had been published in the context of the controversy surrounding the finding of the inquest into the death of Gerry Ryan, who had died on April 30, 2010.

When the case was called before Mr Justice Eamon deValera today, Frank Callinan SC, instructed by solicitor Robert Dore, for Mr Cosgrave, told the judge it had been resolved and an apology from Associated Newspapers was read to be read in court.

This report, the apology stated, was illustrated by a photograph of Aidan Cosgrave present as a friend of Gerry Ryan as a mourner at the funeral and who was said, in both articles, to be a convicted drug dealer.

"Mr Cosgrave is not a convicted drug dealer and has never dealt in drugs," the apology stated.

"Further, any suggestion from our reports that Mr Cosgrave had supplied cocaine to Gerry Ryan that might have contributed to his death or otherwise is wholly unfounded.

"We unreservedly apologise to Mr Cosgrave for the injury to his reputation and for the distress and embarrassment caused to him," the apology stated.


Mr Justice deValera was told the case could be struck out.

In the proceedings, it was claimed Mr Cosgrave was a close personal friend of the late RTE broadcaster and he was deeply distressed at his untimely death and had attended the funeral as a mourner.

(via Roy Greenslade)

Thursday, 21 June 2012

Mail on Sunday apologises to Stephanie O'Keeffe

On 1 April 2012, the Mail on Sunday ran an article about Stephanie O'Keeffe, a freelance reporter, who had done some work for BBC 5Live:

Last night Ms O’Keeffe accepted that the shifts in January had not gone as well as expected.

She said: ‘I worked for 5Live for a couple of weeks as a freelance and read the sports bulletin on two occasions. I did training shifts but I don’t think I was what they wanted.

‘Nobody complained but I think they felt I just wasn’t ready for it. These things happen when you are a freelance.’

The English Literature graduate has also worked for BBC London, Channel 4 News and Al Jazeera.

The paper claimed

Colleagues said she struggled to read from carefully prepared scripts

But also said:

She appears proud of her time at 5Live and has placed one of her bulletins online

So someone tries out for a job and it doesn't quite work out. It might have been because it was the BBC, or because O'Keeffe is - in Chris Hastings' words - 'young' and 'glamorous', but it was not quite clear why the paper thought this so newsworthy.

Hastings added:

Ms O’Keeffe – whose CV includes skills as a model, lists her chest and waist measurements as 32in and 23in and even specifies that she is willing to perform nude – lasted only two shifts at radio station 5Live....

Her online CV, which features pictures of herself, has been circulated among staff after some of them downloaded it.

On Sunday, there was an apology:

On April 1 we said, incorrectly, that the freelance reporter and presenter Stephanie O’Keeffe struggled to read her scripts when working at BBC Radio 5 Live.

We now accept that this was not the case.

Our report could also have been taken to suggest that Ms O’Keeffe obtained her BBC work by submitting a CV that contained her vital statistics and expressed a willingness to work nude.

That was not our intention and we are sorry for any misunderstanding or embarrassment these errors may have caused.

Sunday, 17 June 2012

Mail on Sunday reporters forget they won a £400 iPad

Last week's Mail on Sunday led on an investigation into the website Yipiii:


They also devoted pages six and seven to it:


Yet on 29 May, another article on the Mail website - in the This Is Money section - had been rather positive about Yipiii. Simon Lambert's article began:

If you want to buy something why not play to win it for free first, especially if you can’t lose your stake?

That, in a nutshell, is the theory behind Yipiii, a new website, which offers an ingenious new twist on cashback and reward shopping.

Lambert gave quite a positive answer to a question posed in the headline: 'Is Yipiii a winner?'

Befitting its aim to inject some fun into internet shopping, Yipiii is bold, colourful and easy to use...

It’s true that this moneyback element does essentially make Yipiii risk-free, as any money put in you can get back out, and, in fact, thanks to free spins etc, you actually get back more than you put in...

You sense that if Yipiii could achieve critical mass it could prove to be genuinely revolutionary, as online shops will be extremely interested in signing up and offering good deals – certainly the calibre of partners so far is impressive.

The idea has legs, and so for the curious, it’s definitely worth a spin. Who knows maybe one day the concept will have spread far enough that you could fill the car up with petrol and then spin the wheel to see if you can drive away without paying a penny.

The Mail on Sunday's rather more critical article claimed - in the box at the bottom of page seven - that their reporters had spent £162 on the website and:

only won a £19.99 fish bowl. 

They also claimed:

The reporters did not use the free plays they were offered. 

Yet now, one week later, the Mail on Sunday has published a damning correction and apology:

In our front-page report last week we said Mail on Sunday reporters had spent £162 on Yipiii plays but won only a £20 toy goldfish bowl.

In fact, one reporter used ‘free plays’ acquired during the experiment and went on to win an iPad worth up to £400.

And in a different experiment another journalist spent £40 and won £35 of flowers and a £101 iPod Nano.

We apologise to Yipiii for not mentioning these.

Also, we said customers can top up their accounts as often as they like. In fact, top-ups are limited to £200 per day.

So having claimed they didn't use the free plays and only won a goldfish bowl toy, it emerges they did use the free plays and won an iPod Nano and an iPad - £556-worth of prizes, rather than £20.

The question is: why did the Mail on Sunday's reporters 'forget' to tell their readers that they won these other prizes?