ASA upholds complaint against 'irresponsible' Health Lottery ad

The Advertising Standards Agency has upheld a complaint against an advert for Richard Desmond's Health Lottery that appeared in Richard Desmond's Express.

The ad carried the slogan "Mortgage? What mortgage?" and was criticised by the Gambling Reform & Society Perception Group (GRASP) who:

challenged whether the ad was irresponsible because they believed the ad implied that participating in a lottery was a solution to financial concerns or a way to achieve financial security.

The Health Lottery Ltd claimed that the ad:

in no way depicted participation in a lottery as a solution to financial concerns.

Unsurprisingly:

The Daily Express...said they believed the ad was suitable for publication and re-iterated the points made by The Health Lottery.

However, the ASA ruled:

We considered that because the ad suggested that someone who had won the lottery could pay off their debts, the implication was that participation in the lottery was a way of solving financial concerns or achieving financial security. We noted that the CAP Code stated "Marketing communications must not suggest that participating in a lottery can be a solution to financial concerns ... or a way to achieve financial security. Advertisers may, however, refer to other benefits of winning a prize". We considered that other benefits of a winning a prize included purchasing new goods or experiences, rather than paying off existing debts.

For these reasons, we concluded that the ad was irresponsible because it implied that participating in a lottery was a solution to financial concerns or a way to achieve financial security.

 

'Revealed'

Today's Daily Star claims to have a 'Big Brother exclusive':

By using 'exclusive', the Star implies it is actually 'revealing' the 'big sex secret'.

But it is not. 

Today's story (on the front of Richard Desmond's Daily Star) reveals that Brian Dowling, host of Big Brother (broadcast of Richard Desmond's Channel 5), told new! magazine (owned by Richard Desmond) that he'd like Jasmine Lennard - a former partner of Cowell and housemate on Celebrity Big Brother - to reveal some 'sex secrets'.

But the Star told us under the very similar and equally misleading front page headline 'Cowell's secret Big Bro sex romps' on 31 July:

The model, 27, signed a legal agreement never to spill the beans about her sizzling six-month fling with The X Factor boss.

So nothing has been, or looks likey to be, 'revealed'. 

As Star editor Dawn Neesom told the Leveson Inquiry:

We do rely on people picking up the newspaper off the news stands, which is why our front pages have to be as eye-catching as we can make them.

Shame they aren't as accurate as they could make them.

ASA upholds complaints about Express/Star front page 'offers'

On 5 April, this blog highlighted some 'offers' that appeared on the front pages of the Express and the Star. On one day, the papers highlighted that you could get £5 off at Tesco when you spent £40, a few days later, the same offer for Asda.

Yet when people turned to page x for more details, all they found was a paid for advert promoting an offer that was generally available. In other words, you did not need to buy the Star or the Express in order to get the offer.

Twelve people complained to the Advertising Standards Agency. In response, Express newspapers said:

they did not believe anything in the front-page flashes implied there would be a £5-off coupon inside the newspapers. They said the text did not state or imply that there was a coupon but only that it was possible to get £5 off shopping at Tesco when spending £40. They said the flashes made clear that readers needed to go to the page indicated to find out more and the relevant page contained full details, and the terms and conditions, of the promotion. They said that if a coupon had been part of the promotion they would have stated as much, as they had in other coupon promotions. Express Newspapers believed that making clear a coupon was not required would only have encouraged more consumers to purchase the newspapers, because it was an additional benefit compared to coupon offers. They considered the ads did not misleadingly imply there was a coupon inside the newspapers.

As this blog pointed out in April, several people took to various money saving and voucher forums to complain, as they had believed they needed to buy the paper (and some had done so).

The ASA agreed with them, upholding the complaints on the grounds of misleading advertising:

The ASA noted the front-page flashes did not explicitly state there was a coupon inside the newspapers. We considered, however, the overall impression of the ads, in particular the text "£5 OFF SHOPPING AT TESCO WHEN YOU SPEND £40 DETAILS: PAGE XX", was such that consumers would believe there was a discount offer that was available only to readers, for example in the form of a money-off coupon, on the relevant page. 

We noted that the relevant pages instead included paid-for advertising by Tesco which described a promotion whereby customers would receive a coupon for £5 off the next week's £40 shop if they spent £40 during the current week, rather than receiving a £5 discount when spending only £40 as the front-page flashes stated. 

We understood that promotion was generally available to Tesco customers, rather than only to readers of the Daily Star and Daily Express. We considered the ads misleadingly implied the newspapers included a £5 discount offer that could be redeemed without further significant conditions when spending £40, for example in the form of a coupon, and therefore concluded that they breached the Code.

The ASA can only tell the newspaper not to do it again - not much of a punishment for a long-gone advert - but they also told Express Newspapers:

to ensure future front-page flashes did not misleadingly imply there was a discount offer inside the newspaper that could be redeemed without further significant conditions if that was not the case.

(Hat-tip to Dave)

The Bomber Command 'snub'

The front page on the Sunday Express on 17 June screamed 'BBC snubs our Bomber boys':

The 'exclusive' by Marco Giannangeli and David Stephenson revealed:

The BBC was facing an angry backlash last night over its decision to snub the unveiling of the Bomber ­Command Memorial next week.

While the Queen will be honouring the 55,000 Bomber Boys who gave their lives for the country, BBC1 will be showing repeats of Cash In The Attic and Bargain Hunt.

Skip straight to the end of the article, however, and a quote from a BBC spokesman confirms that the BBC News Channel is, in fact, planning to broadcast the service live and BBC2 will broadcast a 50-minute tribute programme at 5pm (repeated at 11.20pm). Furthermore, the spokesman says:

"The Bomber Command Association are happy with our plans and have been working closely with us."

Some 'snub'.

So what's behind this story appearing on the front page? Firstly, the paper's owner - Richard Desmond:

donated £500,000 to the memorial fund to match £500,000 raised by our readers.

Secondly, Desmond owns Channel 5 and wafer-thin attacks on the BBC are not uncommon on the Sunday Express' front pages (see, for example, this and this).

So what is Desmond's Channel 5 doing to honour the Bomber Command? In what way will its coverage surpass that of the BBC?

According to the listings for 28 June on the Channel 5 website, when the midday service takes place the channel will be showing...Extreme Fishing with Robson Green.

Correction: a repeat of an episode of Extreme Fishing with Robson Green.

So Channel 5 isn't broadcasting the ceremony live, unlike the BBC. Will there be a special programme later, similar to the one the BBC is showing?

Nope. There are three different Big Brother programmes, a film about tornadoes, Monkey Life, The Baby With a New Face, Big Body Squad, two hours of soaps...but nothing on Bomber Command.

When will the Sunday Express also report on this 'snub'?

Dating with Desmond

Today, the homepage of the Daily Star leads with three stories about the Jubilee. The next 'story' is this:

That's the fourth most important story of the day?

The headline and intro reeks of churnalism, but it's only when you read the article - which carries no byline - that you see how shameless it is:

Finding time to make new friends can be hard if you’re already juggling a million things on a daily basis.

And that’s something many of us with hectic lifestyles can identify with. Around five million Brits admit to being too busy to widen their social circle – but what’s the solution?

You need a fast, easy and affordable way to meet like-minded people to have fun with, be that grabbing a drink, chatting over a pub lunch or heading out to the cinema.

Well there’s never been a simpler or safer way to find what you want – and it’s quick, easy and free to join.

Whether you’re just looking for friendship, to date casually, or even a lasting relationship, [name removed], Britain’s newest dating website, promises to make it easier than ever before to meet people you click with in a safe, secure and trusted environment.

Forget anything you may have heard in the past about online dating. There’s a very good reason why more people than ever before are logging on.

Clearly, this is a sales pitch, not a news story. It goes on to name the website in question seven times, and links to the site on five of those occasions. 

An almost identical article about this dating site appears on the Express' website too.

Although churnalism among newspapers isn't exactly uncommon, this is particularly blatant. And when you click through to the dating website, it suddenly becomes clear what's going on here - at the bottom of the homepage it says:

Operated for Northern & Shell by The Dating Lab.

Richard Desmond's Northern and Shell also owns the Star and the Express.

Star's ad campaign for Big Brother begins

The front of today's Daily Star claims there is a 'Fury over Big Bro live sex show':

The article, by Peter Dyke, begins:

Big Brother bosses will spark a major controversy by screening a live sex show in the house.

A 'live sex show'? On Channel 5? Rather than on one of Richard Desmond's 'other' channels?

It sounds unlikely. And as the article goes on, it becomes clear this is hype:

Producers unveiled the luxury Las Vegas-style BB13 house yesterday and it contains the ultimate kinky bedroom.

They have cordoned off two double beds and surrounded them with mirrors and lighting.

It is a clear hint they want the randy wannabes to couple up and put on a rompathon.

So there is no 'live sex show'. And even if there was a 'live sex show' when Big Brother starts next month, broadcasting rules would limit what Channel 5 could show anyway.

Is there any 'fury', as claimed in the front page headline? No. The article does not name, or quote, any furious person or organisation.

So no live sex show and no fury. It is another of those headlines that editor Dawn Neesom would say was 'eye-catching' rather than true.

This is simply about one of Richard Desmond's papers plugging a show on one of his TV channels. Dyke remembers to give the date and time of the broadcast of the first episode of the new series.

It's not the first time the Star has misused 'live sex show'. On the front page on 3 December 2008, it claimed Britney Spears had performed a 'live sex show' on TV when in fact she had simply done a song-and-dance routine on Good Morning America.

And trying to sell Big Brother (and copies of the paper) on it's sex content isn't exactly a new tactic for the Star either. Housemates will 'strut their naked stuff' or the programme will be 'full of naked romps' or it will be the 'sexiest Big Bro ever'. So for today's paper to claim this is a 'shock plan' is nonsense. It's the same tired old 'plan' that the Star claims is afoot every year.

Helpfully, MailOnline's JJ Anisiobi has joined the ad campaign, copying-and-pasting the Star's article into a 'story' which claims the series is already 'courting controversy'.

An advert for an advert

There are offers on the front pages of Richard Desmond's papers almost every day. On Friday 30 March, the Daily Express and the Daily Star had this:

And on Monday 2 April, the same offer for a different supermarket:

So: £5 off a £40 shop at Tesco and Asda - with the promise of more details inside.

But it turned out that those promotions were simply existing offers running at both supermarkets. Those mentions on the front pages were simply adverts for an advert. Like this, in Monday's Express:

In other words, there was absolutely no need to buy the paper to get the offer.

Going by the comments on a couple of voucher and money saving forums, it seems several people were fooled by this.

Some have also mentioned contacting the Advertising Standards Authority. Here's 'Hanonymouse':

This one is ripe for the ASA - there is nothing on the front page that says this is an advertising promotion - and given that previously these HAVE referred to in-paper vouchers, this has to be against the rules. Waste of 30p and shoe leather!

Have complained to the ASA and Tesco - this is very underhand by whoever the promoter is - taking advantage of people who recognise the recent spate of cut-out vouchers and thought this would be the same. Surely if it's an advert and not editorial or a promotion, it needs to say so, especially as it's a BIG ad in the middle at the top of the front page.

(Hat-tip to James Holden)

Richard Desmond and the McCanns

At the Leveson Inquiry on Thursday, there were intriguing exchanges about the McCanns between a clearly unimpressed Robert Jay QC and Richard Desmond, owner of the Daily Express and Daily Star. Desmond coughed up £550,000 in damages for a relentless barrage of defamatory articles and all his papers published front page apologies which read:

The Daily and Sunday Express have taken the unprecedented step of making a front-page apology to Kate and Gerry McCann.

We did so because we accept that a number of articles in the newspaper have suggested that the couple caused the death of their missing daughter Madeleine and then covered it up.

We acknowledge that there is no evidence whatsoever to support this theory and that Kate and Gerry are completely innocent of any involvement in their daughter's disappearance.

We trust that the suspicion that has clouded their lives for many months will soon be lifted.

As an expression of its regret, the Daily Express has now paid a very substantial sum into the Madeleine Fund and we promise to do all in our power to help efforts to find her.

Kate and Gerry, we are truly sorry to have added to your distress.

We assure you that we hope Madeleine will one day be found alive and well and will be restored to her loving family. 

Here's how some of the exchanges went at the Inquiry:

Q. But isn't it fair to say, Mr Desmond, that if you look at the hard facts, I think the McCann litigation involved 38 defamatory articles. It is right, and Mr Ashford has drawn to our attention that there are other newspapers who also perpetrated defamations, but not to the same extent as your papers.

A. Is that -- I'm not sure that's right. I'm not sure that's right at all.

Q. If it's wrong, Mr Sherborne here, who -- the McCanns are his client -- will demonstrate that in due course, but it's certainly my understanding that we're talking about 38 defamatory articles over a four-month period and that your paper was guilty, if I can put it in those terms, of the most egregious and serious defamations, and other papers were guilty of defamations of perhaps less severity in terms of quantity. Do you accept that?

A. Once again, I don't wish to minimise it, right? But four months is -- let me see now, it's 12 weeks?

Q. It's 17 weeks, on my reckoning.

A. 17 weeks, thank you. 17 weeks times 6 -- you have to help me again.

Q. 102, is it, Mr Desmond? I don't know. You're the businessman.

A. Well, I don't know. 102, very good. Is 102.

Q. Yes.

A. And there were 37 --

Q. 38.

A. I'm not trying to win points here, because we did do wrong, but I could say there were more, if there were 102 articles on the McCanns, there were 38 bad ones, then one would say -- and I'm not trying to justify, please, I'm not trying to justify anything, but you could argue there were 65 or 70 good ones.

In other words: yes, we may have accused the McCanns of 'selling their daughter for money and hiding her body in a freezer', but hey, some of our other articles were 'good'.

Yes, you 'could argue' that, although it's hard to see why you'd want to.

Moreover, just because the stories weren't defamatory doesn't make them 'good'.

Desmond continued later:

A. At the end of the day, the McCanns, you know, as I understood it, although I've never met them, were perfectly -- if we ran it for four months, you know, it took them a long time to get involved in a legal dispute with us. They were quite happy, as I understand, in articles being run about their poor daughter, because it kept it on the front page. I think it was only when new lawyers came along, who I think were working on a contingency, that the legal --

Q. I can't --

A. Well, that's the facts. I'm sorry, that is the facts.

Q. Mr Desmond I'm going to interrupt you.

A. I'm sorry, that is the facts.

Q. That must be a grotesque characterisation.

A. I'm sorry, that is the facts.

Q. Your paper was accusing the McCanns on occasion of having killed their daughter. Are you seriously saying that they were sitting there quite happy, rather than entirely anguished by your paper's bad behaviour?

A. I'm sitting here --

Q. Just think about the question before you answer.

A. I'm going to answer your question, and I've already answered it. We ran -- on your suggestion, we've run 102 -- your figure, 102 articles. For four months you say we ran it, right? Nothing happened, to the best of my knowledge, until a new firm of lawyers were instructed, who were on a contingency, that then came in to sue us.

Clarence Mitchell, spokesman for the McCanns, said in response to Desmond's evidence:

"Mr Desmond's memory is apparently doing him a great disservice. For him to suggest that Kate and Gerry were happy with Express Newspapers' coverage, he must be living in a parallel universe." Desmond's portrayal of the McCanns' reaction to his papers' coverage of their daughters' disappearance was "grotesque in the extreme", he added. He said that the coverage, some of which was just "lies", had added to the suffering they endured.

Still, at least Desmond's many apologies to the McCanns sounded genuine. Didn't they?

But once again, please, I do apologise to the McCanns. I'm not trying to -- I am very sorry for -- you know, I am very sorry for the thing and I am very sorry that we got it wrong, but please don't, you know, try and -- every paper was doing the same thing

...

once again I do apologise to the McCanns, you know, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, but there are views on -- there are views on the McCanns of what happened. And there are still views on the McCanns of what happened.

Somehow, ending an apology with 'et cetera, et cetera, et cetera' doesn't suggest it's entirely heartfelt.

Ethical

From the Leveson Inquiry yesterday:

Robert Jay QC: What interest, if any, do you have in ethical standards within your papers, or is that purely a matter for the editors?

Richard Desmond, owner of the Daily Express and Daily Star: Well, ethical, I don't quite know what the word means, but perhaps you'll explain what the word means, ethical.

Richard Desmond and the Daily Star

In November 2011, Richard Desmond was trumpeting the circulation figures of the Daily Star:

The Daily Star was selling 400,000 when we bought it, it now sells around 800,000.  

As this blog pointed out at the time, his figures weren't accurate. The Daily Star was actually selling 627,317 copies per day in November 2000, when he bought it. The October 2011 ABCs showed the figure was around 658,690 at the time he spoke.

In fact, the Daily Star's circulation hasn't been above 800,000 since September 2010.

When giving evidence to the Leveson Inquiry yesterday, Desmond admitted:

We see the figures daily

So surely he would be able to give Lord Leveson a more accurate picture of the Star's circulation? Not exactly:

We've invested more in the Daily Star than, you know -- just look at the product. It's fantastic. At the end of the day the reader decides, and 11 years ago we were selling about 400,000 copies a day and now we're selling 700, 800,000 copies a day in a mature newspaper market, shall we say. I think it's fantastic what we've done on the Daily Star, but the readers have decided, you know, they can't get enough of it.

If someone genuinely believes the Daily Star is 'fantastic', it's hard to take much else they say seriously.

Not unsurprisingly, he simply repeated the same incorrect figures he'd used before. If he does see the figures so often, how can he get them so wrong?

Moreover, the latest ABCs - released today - are even worse news for Desmond. They show that in December 2011, the Daily Star's circulation was 616,498 copies per day.

That means the Star is now selling, on average, 11,000 fewer copies per day than when Desmond acquired the paper just over eleven years ago.

Ahem:

I think it's fantastic what we've done on the Daily Star, but the readers have decided, you know, they can't get enough of it.

(Meanwhile the circulation of the Express has dropped from 985,253 in November 2000 to 596,415 in December 2011 while he's been owner.)

(More on Desmond's evidence from Steven Baxter and The Guardian, while Roy Greenslade looks at the media's reaction to it.)

Desmond gets his figures wrong

As Richard Desmond unveiled his new printing plant in Luton yesterday, he was asked by the Press Gazette:

why he was making the investment at a time when print newspaper circulations in general are declining.

He replied:

“My newspapers haven’t declined over the last 11 years. The Daily Star was selling 400,000 when we bought it, it now sells around 800,000. Eleven years ago there wasn’t a Daily Star Sunday, it now sells more than 800,000 every Sunday. The Daily Express and Sunday Express are in line with the market.”

He is right that sales of the Star haven't declined overall. But only just - and his figures are completely wrong.

The Daily Star was actually selling 627,317 in November 2000, when he bought it.

Not 400,000.

Based on the October 2011 ABCs, it now sells 658,690 copies per day.

Not 800,000.

The Daily Star Sunday doesn't sell 800,000 every Sunday either.

The figure, from the October ABCs is 688,058. It has benefitted a lot from the closure of the News of the World as back in June it was selling only 305,978 copies every Sunday. 

And the Daily Express? When Desmond acquired it, it had a daily circulation of 985,523.

The October 2011 ABCs show a daily circulation of 614,534.

A decline of 370,989 copies per day.

So he wasn't correct to say there has been no decline over the last 11 years. But at least he didn't repeat the claim he made in June when he said sales of the Express had 'increased dramatically'.

Express: 'every criticism we levelled against the EU has been justified'

On Wednesday 23 November, Patrick O'Flynn of the Daily Express penned an article that ran under the optimistic headline 'A year in and our EU crusade is on course for victory'.

Flynn told his readers how wonderful the Express' campaign to withdraw from the EU has been so far and he said:

Over the course of the past year every criticism we levelled against the EU has been justified...

Every criticism justified.

Five days before, the Express front page carried the lead headline 'EU says water is not healthy'.

In fact, the ruling by the European Food Standards Agency was about water and dehydration and not about whether water is 'healthy' or not. Indeed, the word 'healthy' doesn't appear anywhere in the EFSA's 7-page ruling. But the Express knew that because at the end they included this:

EU spokesman David D’Arcy said last night: “Of course drinking water is essential for health and the commission is not stopping anyone from saying so."

(More on this story from Richard Laming, Martin Robbins and Tim Fenton)

Also at the end of Giles Sheldrick's article on water was this 'criticism':

The EU has a long history of passing bizarre regulations...last year attempts to regulate the use of root vegetables in Cornish pasties sparked chaos.

But this claim isn't 'justified' either. It was the Cornish Pasty Association that had applied for:

Protected Geographical Indication to request that only Cornish pasties made in Cornwall and to the traditional recipe and manner are called Cornish pasties.

As the Association pointed out in response to inaccurate media reports at the time:

the European Commission (EC) does not dictate ingredients or names of ingredients

It's also not clear what 'chaos' was sparked by this.

In October, the Express joined other newspapers in claiming 'Now Euro killjoys ban children's party toys' which forced the EC Representative in the UK to explain the story was 'nonsense':

"Brussels" has not banned balloons or any of the other things mentioned.

Was the Express 'justified' in claiming the University of Northampton had been fined £56,000 for not flying the EU flag?

No. The response from EC regional spokesman Tom van Lierop:

"you don't have to wave a big flag above a project: that's nonsense...We're not fining anyone...We don't want to be flying the EU flag above any kind of project...these stories are total lunacy."

This wasn't the only 'EU flag' story that the paper got wrong. In May the Express front page said 'Now we must fly EU flag on our public buildings'. The article added that there was:

a swingeing fine from Brussels threatened for those that disobey

Jonathan Scheele, Head of European Commission Representation in the UK and Michael Shackleton, Head of European Parliament Information Office in the UK wrote to the Express:

only 2 buildings in the UK are expected to fly the European flag for Europe Day and the Commission would not fine countries that did not do so...No other public building has to fly the flag on 9 May.

The Express' decided not to publish this letter but chose instead to publish three readers' letters that repeated the original claims, despite the paper being aware they were false.

But remember:

every criticism we levelled against the EU has been justified.

A few days before that one, another front page headline claimed: 'EU wants to merge UK with France'. The Arc Manche network was set up in 1995 for co-operation between southern British and northern French regions. But this is clearly not the same as 'merging the UK with France'. 'Absurd' and 'untrue' said the EC in the UK.

Also in May, an Express front page stated: 'Ban shopping bags says EU'. As with the healthy water headline, the Express used 'says' when they meant 'haven't said'.

The European Commission had launched a public consultation:

asking the public how best to reduce the use of plastic carrier bags

There was a question about whether a ban was needed, as there were questions about charging for bags and other possible options. The EU has not said 'ban plastic bags'.

Is the EU 'employing 33 people to help boost the EU’s profile in Fiji'? No. Although based in Fiji, the delegation:

covers the entire South Pacific region. It carries out countless development projects on behalf of the EU as well as foreign relations and political work.

Do 'Cars face ban from all cities' as part of 'another plan forced on us by crazy EU'? No:

the European Commission is not considering an EU level ban on cars in city centres by 2050. Cities are of course best placed to decide their own transport mix.

As O'Flynn specified 'the past year' it would, of course, be unfair to mention earlier stories such as 'EU says: hammer British drivers' (once again, they hadn't said this) or 'EU’s plan to liquify corpses and pour them down the drain' ("The EU has no competence in this matter and to suggest otherwise is wide of the mark").

It would be wrong to mention their July 2010 front page headline 'France votes to ban burkha' which came a month after their front page headline 'You can't ban burkha, says Eurocrats' (again, they hadn't said this).

It would not be 'justified' to mention the Sunday Express' claim that the EU was spending '£670million on making explicit films' was overblown. But it was, perhaps, understandable - after all, Richard 'pornographer' Desmond doesn't want too many rivals in the 'explicit film' business, does he?

And it would be best to forget the Express story 'Euro meddlers rule we can't have milk jugs'/'EU spouts off...about our milk jugs'. This took research from a Spanish university and claimed it was evidence that the EU wanted to ban 'our milk jugs'.

Similarly, in October 2011, the Express labelled 'scientists from the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM)' as 'Eurocrats'.

These are just some of the Express' anti-EU stories covered by this blog and others over the last couple of years and which have been inaccurate, misleading and wrong.

With the Express newspapers being outside any form of regulation, there is no way to challenge these stories. As shown on the flag issue, when the EU tries to deal with the paper, the Express ignores them and carries on repeating untruths.

Yet to O'Flynn, the paper's Chief Political Commentator:

every criticism we levelled against the EU has been justified...

Sorry we said you had criminal record

Today's Daily Star published the following apology to Garry (brother of Cheryl) Tweedy:

In Court yesterday the Daily Star apologised to Garry Tweedy for an article published on 13 April in which we incorrectly reported that Mr Tweedy had admitted on his Facebook profile that he had been to prison a few times.

We accepted that Mr Tweedy did not post this comment nor has he ever been charged or convicted of a criminal offence nor been sent to prison. We apologised to Mr Tweedy for this error.

Not only has the Star apologised, but they have agreed to pay damages and legal costs to Mr Tweedy. It adds to a long line of recent libel payouts by Richard Desmond's Express Newspapers.

Heat magazine will also pay damages and apologise, after they first published the false claims. The Guardian explains:

Heat's front page article on 12 April, headlined "Cheryl's family from hell", featured a photograph of Tweedy with the caption "[Garry Tweedy] reveals prison past on Facebook".

An article inside that edition of the weekly was headed "US dream in peril thanks to Cheryl's family misfortunes" and made a number of false statements about Tweedy, his solicitor Steven Tregear said in a statement read out at the high court on Tuesday.

The Daily Star falsely claimed in an article published on 13 April, headlined "Cheryl in peril", that Tweedy had admitted on Facebook that he had been in prison a few times. "The Facebook profile [the Daily Star] relied upon was a fake," Tregear said. "[Tweedy] did not post the comment and he has never been charged or convicted of any criminal offence or sent to prison."

More cross-promotion from Richard Desmond

The Wednesday editions of the Daily Express and Daily Star can hardly contain their excitement about the launch of the new Health Lottery:

Despite the fact it has only launched today, the Express article by Padraic Flanagan explains that it is:

Britain's biggest lottery

Of course, it was to be expected that these papers would give the lottery such glowing, prominent coverage. Why?

Because the Health Lottery is being run by Northern and Shell - the Richard Desmond-owned company that also owns...the Daily Express and the Daily Star.

One thing the papers probably won't mention is the criticism levelled at the Health Lottery for giving 20.5p of every £1 ticket to good causes, compared with the National Lottery's 28p.

Daily Star Sunday: Not Britain's 'No. 1 paper'

On Saturday, the Daily Express decided to report on the latest Audit Bureau of Circulations figures which showed a slight increase in sales for the paper.

The headline, however, claimed that this increase meant there was:

The increase from July to August was 3,812 copies a day and this was the second consecutive month of increased sales.

But the daily circulation in August stood at 629,764. In May, they were selling 631,588 copies per day.

Moreover, when Richard Desmond acquired the paper in 2000, the Express' circulation stood at 985,253 and has never risen above that figure (despite what he claimed in a television interview). 

Despite using the 'World's Greatest Newspaper' slogan on the front page every day (don't laugh) it sells fewer copies than the Sun, Mail, Mirror, Star and Telegraph.

'No stopping' the Express?

The paper claims this month-on-month increase is partly down to its 'leading news coverage'. 

By 'leading news coverage' it must mean front page health 'secrets' such as exercise being good for you and smoking being bad for you.

And the Express isn't the only Demond paper celebrating the latest ABCs.

Today's Daily Star Sunday claims it is:

It's not clear how the Express can be the 'greatest' newspaper in the world if it isn't even 'No. 1' in Britain.

Anyway, obedient hack Neil Chandler writes:

We're the most successful newspaper in Britain – and that’s OFFICIAL!

The basis for this claim is that the paper has seen a 95% year-on-year increase in sales. Like other Sunday tabloids, it has benefited hugely from the closure of the News of the World.

What it neglects to mention is that in July 2010, it was selling a meagre 370,032 copies every Sunday - the smallest circulation of any daily or Sunday red-top in Britain.

The paper boasts:

Our performance was 28% better than the dull Sunday Mirror – and a stonking 29% better than the tired old People.

The paper is, however, only telling half the story with those figures and it neglects to mention something rather important.

In August 2011, the Daily Star Sunday sold 744,981 copies every Sunday.

But the 'tired old People' sold 892,033 copies every Sunday. 

And the 'dull' Sunday Mirror sold 1,900,460 copies every Sunday.

Indeed, not only does 'the most successful newspaper in Britain' (ahem) sell fewer copies every week than the Sunday Mirror and The People, it trails well behind the Mail on Sunday (2,098,244 copies) too.

Ignoring those inconvenient stats, the Daily Star Sunday soldiers on, explaining exactly why it's so 'successful':

No other paper got anywhere near. And it’s no surprise.

We stunned the world with our amazing exclusive that Jessie Wallace’s fella had sent a saucy pic of her to his ex...

And our exclusive that David Beckham had a gun guard was followed up around the world.

This is the best the paper can come up to show the quality of its 'news'. Rich man's bodyguard carries a gun. Soap star has relationship problems.

And wouldn't it have been hard to 'stun the world' with the Jessie Wallace 'news' considering most of the world doesn't know who she is?

The paper's assertion that it is Britain's number one is as hollow and ridiculous as the Express' 'World's Greatest' claim.

Daily Star, Big Brother, lies (cont.)

The Daily Star's coverage of Celebrity Big Brother shows no sign of slipping off their front page. It also shows little sign of reflecting actual events.

Wednesday's front page clearly implies 'sobbing' Amy Childs has got the 'BB boot' and has been voted out of the Big Brother house in an 'eviction shock'.

In fact, she's still in the house and hasn't been evicted - as Peter Dyke's article makes very clear.

If the show is as thrilling as the 'Official Big Brother Paper' wants us to believe, why does it feel the need to resort to such blatantly deceptive headlines?

Richard Desmond, the Daily Star and Big Brother

When giving evidence in the libel case he brought against Tom Bower - a case he lost but continues to claim he won - Richard Desmond, owner of the Daily Express, Daily Star and Channel 5, said:

'I give no orders on the editorial. The editor decides what goes in the papers.'

Yet there has been a marked increase in the number of puff pieces for Channel 5 since Desmond acquired the channel just over a year ago. The blatant advertising in 'news articles'. The TV critic's recommendations for Channel 5 shows. Leo McKinstry's op-ed piece suggesting The Mentalist (shown on Channel 5) was the 'best TV detective of them all'.

But all this must be coincidental as it is solely down to the editor as to 'what goes in the papers'.

Now there's Big Brother, which Channel 5 has resurrected after it was killed off by Channel 4 because of falling ratings. It's true to say that the Star has long been obsessed with reality TV shows. Previous series of Big Brother, The X Factor and I'm A Celebrity have always had lots of coverage.

But since the start of August, the Daily Star has written 42 articles about Big Brother, including nine in the last two days. And the paper has been full of gushing praise for the show.

On 2 August we were told in an editorial that Big Brother was the perfect antidote to a gloomy summer:

So far 2011 has been a summer to forget. Rocketing prices, grim weather and tragic news have all cast a shadow. We desperately need something to shake off the gloom.

Now Big Brother is ready to explode back on our screens. And it’s set to be the most sensational series yet...Watching the exploits of all the housemates will get the nation smiling again. Sexy contestants will raise temperatures whatever the weather...A daily dose is sure to put the sparkle back into summer.

Less than two weeks later, another Star editorial claimed something similar:

While we rebuild after the riots, we must remember that life is not all doom and gloom. We need to crack a smile now more than ever. That’s why we’re DELIGHTED Big Brother is on its way back.

The Star has also been involved in feverish speculation about who the housemates for Celebrity Big Brother might be.

On 2 April, we were told by Nigel Pauley that Andy Gray, Natalie (cousin of Wayne) Rooney and Jenny Thompson were 'in line for deals'.

The following day, the Daily Star Sunday provided a much longer list of people who were wanted for the show: Charlie Sheen, Mohammed Al-Fayed, Ricky Hatton, Tinie Tempah, Joanna Lumley, Samara Weaving, Chelsy Davy, Peaches Geldof, Max George and Abbey Clancy.

A few days later, another name was mentioned on the Star's front page:


But whereas the headline clearly said Karima El Mahroug was 'in', the article by Peter Dyke said only that she was being 'lined up' for the show.

As the Guardian's Lost in Showbiz commented soon after:

LiS is certain that this is an entirely accurate reflection of the kind of celebrity that's going to rock up on a Channel 5 reality show and in no way just a random list of people currently in the news.

The names kept coming: ex-WAG Elen Rivas, model Arianny Celeste, singer Rachel Stevens and, inevitably, Imogen Thomas.

On 24 May, the paper's front page claimed that Snoop Dogg was 'going in Big Bro house' along with Radio 1's Tim Westwood. Four days later, it was Amy Winehouse who was 'going in' despite the fact her spokesman was quoted at the end of Nigel Pauley's article saying:

Amy had “no plans at the moment” to be a BB contestant.

On 5 June, the Daily Star Sunday's Ed Gleave was looking to America, mentioning Reservoir Dogs' Michael Madsen, 'Playboy girl' Bridget Marquardt and Rachel Uchitel, 'one of Tiger Woods’ mistresses'. Singer Steve Strange was mentioned by Katie Begley on 19 July and was declared 'TV gold' by a suspiciously anonymous 'pal'.

Pamela Anderson was said to be 'on the brink' of joining the show, while Peter Dyke claimed that Sid Owen had 'signed up'.

On 26 July, it appeared that the Star was suggesting Britney Spears was going to appear, running the front page headline 'Britney Big Bro dream'. It turned out, however, that she was host Brian Dowling's 'dream housemate'.

The fact that Dowling was to host Big Brother may have come as a surprise to Daily Star readers who remembered this front page from 31 March:


But then that clearly bogus story was quickly denied by Cole's spokesman who said she had 'no interest in presenting' the show.

And several of the other rumours started by the Star have resulted in firm denials.

The Star repeatedly linked Mike Tyson to the show. His response?


On 30 July, the paper claimed on the front page that Sarah Ferguson was 'set to join BB':


In the article, Katie Begley wrote:

Sarah Ferguson has given Celebrity Big Brother the royal seal of approval.

She has?

Sarah Ferguson, The Duchess of York, is the latest A-list celeb being lined up for the Channel 5 reality show...

The 51-year-old royal, who cleared her £2million debt earlier this year, has been offered a lucrative deal.

But soon after, Ferguson tweeted:


That was followed by the 'world exclusive' that Charlie Sheen was to be on the show, which was splashed on the front page on 1 August:

Katie Begley said Sheen had a £6million deal to appear. But within hours, Sheen's spokesman dismissed this as 'totally untrue'.

The day before the programme began, the Star finally mentioned one of its favourite celebs and claimed that Jordan was going to 'bust' into the house:

Peter Dyke wrote:

Jordan is set to go in...glamour girl and mum Kate Price, 33, has given a clear hint she wants to be in on the act.

For this claim, Dyke relied on the word of another anonymous pal. Had he bothered to ask the not-usually-shy-of-the-media Price, he might have found out what she thought:

Perhaps most ridiculously of all, today's front page says:


It should be clear to anyone that these are look-a-likes, but it's still shameless (and pointless?). But it takes the Star ages to admit it's all fake. Here's Peter Dyke:

Celebrity Big Brother has welcomed its biggest ever stars to the famous TV house – Prince William and Princess Kate.

As our amazing pictures show, the new-look Channel 5 Celebrity Big Brother has royal connections. The couple enjoyed a stay in the most famous house in Britain, after Buckingham Palace of course.

And we were there to capture the historic moment. The lovebirds, who married in April, frolicked on one of the luxury double beds in the bedroom. But Wills made sure the plush covers hid his crown jewels from those pesky spy cameras. Then they went for a dip in the BB pool in the garden.

Cheeky Wills even braved a bath in the BB tub, with Kate giving him a scrubdown. Without any servants on hand, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, both 29, headed to the state- of-the-art kitchen to whip up some lunch.

Afterwards they checked out the comfy sofas and chairs and took a peek at the BB welcome book and giggled at all the rules the new housemates will have to live by.

Last night a source said: “Wills and Kate are the most famous stars we have ever had in that house. It’s an amazing coup for us.

“There have been a few princesses such as Nikki Grahame and camp queens like Marco the clapping seal over the years. But they pale in comparison to these royals.”

However, if readers take a closer look they will see that “William and Kate” are in fact lookalikes.

That anonymous source quote sounds very unlikely - how can anyone claim it's an 'amazing coup' if it isn't really them?

Well, tonight the show has launched - and not one of the celebrities mentioned above has made an appearance. This doesn't necessarily mean they won't - people have gone into the house mid-way through the series before. But having got so much wrong, it doesn't look good for a paper that is billing itself as the 'Official Big Brother paper'.

At around 10pm, Friday's Daily Star front page was being distributed:
It's not quite clear how 'boobs' can win a reality TV show - and there's no quote in the article by Nadine Linge and Emma Wall that backs up the headline anyway. But look at the top of the page - before the programme had even finished, the Star had decided it had won a 'record audience'. Now, that may turn out to be true, but you suspect they had decided that line well in advance.

Similarly, the Daily Star Sunday's Ed Gleave tweeted that it was 'OFFICIALLY the best CBB launch ever!' Who'd have thought?

So what else should viewers expect? It's very clear the Star is going to try, desperately, to sell the show on its sex appeal.

Here's Peter Dyke on 13 August:

Celebrity Big Brother bosses have built a house of fun… and fear.

The good news for the stars is that it’s full of naughty treats. The gang, including The Only Way Is Essex babe Amy Childs, 21, and American Pie star Tara Reid, 35, can get frisky on a “sex-ercise machine” in the gym.

It is a vibrating power plate that bosses claim will give everyone a saucy thrill. The cameramen will also be able to catch footage of the lasses’ bouncing boobs.

How proud Dyke must be of that story.

The Star has promised a 'battle of the boobs' and that there will be 'hunks to sex up Big Brother'. There's going to be so much 'very sexy footage' it's going to nicknamed 'Peep Brother'. On 16 August, the Star said there was a 'big sexy shock':


But it's not much of a 'shock' or an 'exclusive' when the paper has been continually boasting about how much sex there is going to be. The blurb at the bottom claims:

Celebrity Big Brother will be full of naked romps

Of course, the Star's definition of the word 'romp' is an odd one. It has claimed a trip to an estate agent was a 'sexy girlie romp'. It has claimed people taking a shower are having a 'naked romp'.

But 'romp' is likely to be one of the words that will appear quite frequently on the Star's front page in the next few weeks as it desperately tries to drum up interest in Celebrity Big Brother (and the series of Big Brother that follows). Look out also for 'sex plot' and 'girl-on-girl lust' and at some point they may well claim that something has happened that is too naughty to be shown.

That 16 August front page also shows cross-promotion at its, err, finest. The Desmond-owned Star heavily promoting a programme on the Desmond-owned Channel 5, using a picture of Amy Childs taken from a photoshoot she did with the Desmond-owned new! magazine.

Expect much more of the shameless plugging and many more dubious front page headlines over the next few weeks...

Express: 'ban migrants'

The front page headline on today's Daily Express screams:


'Britain must ban migrants'.

Macer's Hall article goes on to favourably report the words of Labour peer Lord Glasman, which were published by the Telegraph yesterday. Shouldn't the 'World's Greatest Newspaper' have got the interview first, rather than treating it as front page news a day later?

Here's what the Telegraph reported:

Glasman has previously accused New Labour of lying about the extent of immigration. Now he goes further, arguing – in terms more radical than the Conservative front bench would dare use – that Britain should renegotiate the rules on European workers and freeze inward migration for EU and non-EU citizens, except where employers or universities make a case for a specific, skilled individual.

"We've got to reinterrogate our relationship with the EU on the movement of labour. The EU has gone from being a sort of pig farm subsidised bloc... to the free movement of labour and capital. It's legalistic, it's administrative, and it's no good. So I think we've got to renegotiate with the EU.

His call is to restrict immigration to necessary entrants such as highly skilled leaders, especially in vocational skills. "We might, for example, bring in German masters, as we did in the 15th and 16th centuries to renew guilds."

But exemptions should be made on a case-by-case basis? "Yes. We should absolutely do that... Britain is not an outpost of the UN. We have to put the people in this country first." Even if that means stopping immigration completely for a period? "Yes. I would add that we should be more generous and friendly in receiving those [few] who are needed. To be more generous, we have to draw the line."

So although Glasman does say a temporary halt to immigration might be necessary, he seems to contradict that by saying that he does still want to allow in people with specific skills and that:

we should be more generous and friendly in receiving those [few] who are needed.

Yet the Express have turned 'restrict immigration to necessary entrants' and 'more generous and friendly to those who are needed' into 'ban migrants' - whatever that might mean.

But this headline isn't really about Glasman's words. It's about what the Express thinks and wants. It's in much the same vein as their 'Keep out, Britain is full up' front page from 23 September 2009 and their use of 'ethnics' in July 2010, and it's insidious stuff.

Daily Star: 'shamelessly looking to cash in'

From 6 June to today, the Daily Star has put the word 'Giggs' in its main front page headline every single day (this excludes the Daily Star Sunday, which has stuck with Pippa Middleton for the last two weeks). The first twelve of these front pages are available on the Media Blog.

Yet on 17 June - the 11th day - the paper's editorial was criticising the people involved in this tawdry story for forgetting there are:

little children at the centre of this scandal.

And for:

shamelessly looking to cash in

Indeed.

Today, the 14th front page claims that 'Sex addict Giggs gets therapy':

It's another story that the Star calls an 'exclusive' and states that Giggs is in some kind of therapy. Is he?

Here's how Jerry Lawton begins his article:

Manchester United have signed up God to keep bedhopping stars like Ryan Giggs on the straight and narrow.

God?

Club chaplain Rev John Boyers revealed his job now involves teaching players about “sexual ethics”. The morality lessons come after the club has been rocked by a series of sex scandals...

Now club bosses want Rev Boyers to lecture rising stars on sexual morality in a bid to stop future scandals.

So Giggs isn't actually 'getting therapy'. The Star's 'exclusive' is that Manchester United FC has a chaplain. But this isn't really an 'exclusive', or even news, as Boyers has been doing that job since 1992.

But the Star tries to pretend there's something new here. Lawton says Boyers is 'now' teaching about 'sexual ethics' 'after' recent 'sex scandals' - as if this is somehow linked to the Giggs case.

It isn't.

He quotes Boyers saying:

“I do some work with the academy teaching them life skills – situations in life they may encounter and how they might cope.

“Things like friendship, sexual ethics, bereavement, bullying and prejudice, racism. I try to help them prepare for adult life.

But compare that to something Boyers wrote in a June 2010 article called 'Prayers for the players' (pdf):

I do some educational work with younger academy players. SCORE has some ‘Life-skills’ teaching material which looks at issues such as friendships, bereavement, bullying, sexual ethics, decision making, prejudice, privilege and responsibility etc.

Lawton goes on to quote Boyers saying:

“I also do general pastoral support and spiritual support work right across the club...

“We’ve had many situations in football ranging from drugs scandals to financial scandals and behavioural scandals which show there is real worth in having a chaplaincy.’’

And compare that to a quote from Boyers found in an Independent article from November 1995:

"Clubs are seeing the value of the chaplaincy as a pastoral and spiritual safety net...

"We've had many situations in football ranging from drugs scandals to financial scandals and behavioural scandals which show there is real worth in having a chaplaincy."

It could be the Boyers has said the same things then and now. But it appears that Lawton is copying previous statements from Boyers that he's found on the internet and is making them out to be both new and related to Giggs.

Lawton adds:

The minister will not discuss individual cases.

Which sounds a bit like the Independent's:

Rev Boyers won't discuss individual cases...

Lawton then relies on the anonymous sources he's so fond of using, claiming:

But club sources say Giggs has come under his wing during his 21-year career with Manchester United.

“I guess some people heed advice more than others,’’ the source said.

“Rev John is a highly regarded member of the team and does his best to help set our young players along the right path. Handling fame and all that goes with it is not easy.’’

Note that the 'club source' doesn't actual back up the contention made in the sentence before it.

So the story is nonsense, dubiously assembled and almost completely fictitious.

And so have most of the Star's front pages 'stories' about Giggs over the last few weeks, including the 'sexy girlie romp' that turned out to be a trip to an estate agent and the joke that was treated as fact. And many of them carry the byline of Jerry Lawton, the man behind the infamous Grand Theft Auto: Rothbury article.

For example, yesterday's front page stated:


The 'lover' in question is not Imogen Thomas, who is pictured in her underwear, but Giggs' sister-in-law Natasha. 'Sex romp revenge' sounds like a set of random Daily Star buzzwords, thrown together to sell papers. It's also an 'exclusive'. It says on the front page:

Ryan Giggs's sister-in-law lover will romp with EIGHT celebrity hunks to make the footie love cheat jealous.

This shows, of course, that the Star is deeply concerned about the:

little children at the centre of this scandal.

Lawton's article goes on to reveal:

Natasha, 28, has revealed to Facebook pals the names of eight stars she drools over.

So: woman tells friends that she fancies some celebs. It's not quite the same as saying she 'will romp' with them all in some 'sex revenge plot'.

Saturday's front page story claimed:


'I dressed a French maid', plus the word 'exclusive' and the photo all make it appear as if this was an interview, or at least an actual statement from a woman involved (Natasha, again).

The article by Lawton and Aaron Tinney began:

Ryan Giggs liked his sister-in-law lover to dress up as a French maid.

The Star's 'proof' for this claim:

Naughty Natasha, 28, donned a pink frilly micro-skirt and black G-string with white spots to thrill him.

And she was so proud of her cheeky look she showed it off on her Facebook site. Although her snap showed only her bottom she assured friends it was hers.

Pals said the fantastic figure she reveals in the photo explains why married Manchester United legend Ryan, 37, was tempted to play away from home for eight years.

So: woman posts picture of her bum on Facebook. Neither the anonymous pal who is quoted nor anyone else says anything about dressing as a French maid - except Lawton.

The day before, the paper was claiming 'another great Daily Star exclusive':


Once again, the headline makes it sound as if this is something that has actually been said. In this case, by Kym Marsh. 'Giggs bedded babe in my home'? Well, here's Lawton again:

Coronation Street beauty Kym Marsh fears Ryan Giggs romped in her bedroom with his sister-in-law... Kym, 35, and partner Jamie Lomas, 31...believe the lovers got it on in their posh pad.

So no actual proof then? And did Marsh actually say that?

One of Kym’s pals told the Daily Star: “Kym believes they could have been using her bedroom for their affair."

Ah, of course - another anonymous pal, who reveals that someone thinks something might have happened in their house before they moved in but since they weren't there don't really have any idea whether it did. Or not.

That's 'another great Daily Star exclusive'.

The day before that, the Star came up with this 'exclusive':


A 'baby bump'. 'Who's the daddy'? Here's Jerry 'the Pulitzer's coming soon' Lawton again:

Ryan Giggs was in shock last night after his sister-in-law lover flew home proudly sporting a mummy tummy.

Since Giggs isn't quoted, there's no way of knowing if he's 'shocked' or not. That's assuming she's even pregnant:

Natasha Giggs, 28, sparked speculation she might be pregnant as she jetted back to Britain looking rounder than normal.

Since she's only been in the public eye a few weeks, it's hard to know how the paper can claim to know what her 'normal' shape is.

But 'sparked speculation she might be pregnant'? That's a bit different to a definite 'baby bump'. Who was speculating?

One onlooker said: “The terminal was buzzing with talk that Natasha is pregnant again. She might just have been comfort-eating but if she is expecting, it will be yet another nightmare for Giggsy.”

So the speculation is from the all-seeing anonymous 'onlooker' who may or may not be someone in the Daily Star 'newsroom'.

The Mail website carried the same photos of Natasha Giggs at the airport. They didn't mention any 'speculation' and their pictures don't really show any noticeable 'baby bump'. But claiming someone is pregnant when they aren't is something the Star has done several times before.

Despite churning out this inaccurate, misleading, utterly tedious drivel day after day, the Daily Star still manages to be the fourth best-selling daily newspaper in the UK. But is the 15.9% fall in sales between April 2010 and April 2011 a sign that their readers are getting tired of being treated like fools?