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.

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.

The People corrects article on trans police officers

The PCC has published details of a resolved complaint which will see The People admit:

In an article of 3 June reporting on transsexual police officers, we stated that transsexual officers were exempt from body searches and officers could take a year's paid leave for gender reassignment. In fact, transsexual officers, are able to perform the full range of duties performed by any other police officer and there are currently no police forces where officers can take a year's paid leave for gender re-assignment.

It seems there were further problems with Nick Dorman's article, which were outlined at the time by Jane Fae. For example, Dorman wrote:

Suspects can only be searched by ­officers of the same sex and transsexuals cannot change theirs on birth certificates.

The claim about birth certificates is not accurate, and hasn't been since the Gender Recognition Act came into effect in 2005.

Jane also reveals some of how the paper responded to the complaint.   

At time of writing, the original article remains uncorrected on the People's website.

The People pays damages over drunken proposal 'exclusive'

On 6 November 2011, the People published this 'exclusive':

Charlotte Church has proposed to her boyfriend Jonathan Powell during a boozy pub karaoke night.

The star belted out The Ronettes’ Be My Baby then slumped in a chair next to her man and gave him a huge kiss. She told him: “That was for you because I want you to be my baby. Will you marry me?”

He replied: “Yes but I don’t want to be known as Mr Church.”

The pair, both 25, then ordered bottles of champagne “one each” and celebrated into the early hours of last Saturday morning at the pub, the Robin Hood in Cardiff.

A friend said: “Jonathan was thrilled and Charlotte was very happy. She was singing I’m Getting ­Married in the Morning as we helped her to the taxi afterwards.”

Church immediately issued a statement, pointing out the story was rubbish:

"This story is a complete fabrication. I have not proposed to my boyfriend, drunkenly or otherwise. It is embarrassing for me (and him) for our families and friends to read that I have.

I was not in the pub they mention on the night they allege this happened. I haven't been there for 5 months. At the time that I was apparently drunkenly proposing I was in fact performing in a completely different town with a large public audience.

There is literally not one shred of truth in this story, and it is still alarming to me that lies of this scale can be printed. This is not journalism. It's a perfect example of why this out of control tabloid industry needs regulation immediately."

Today, the paper has agreed to pay substantial damages and legal fees, has apologised and agreed not to repeat the accusations. Lawyers for the People said in court that it:

accepts that the story was completely untrue and should not have been published. It has previously apologised in the newspaper and online for publishing the allegation, which it accepted was incorrect after Charlotte first complained.

There's no explanation has to how the People came to publish the story and all those fictional quotes. It is also worth noting that the Mail and Sun were quick to repeat the People's claims without doing any fact-checking of their own.

The People had already published one apology - three weeks after the original story appeared and, coincidentally, one day before Church gave evidence at the Leveson Inquiry. The Inquiry was told that apology was a 'unilateral one' and 'just not good enough'.

Sorry we said you raped a 14-year-old

The natural father of Peter Connelly (Baby P) has been awarded substantial damages after The People accused him of being a sex offender who had been convicted of raping a 14-year-old girl.

MediaGuardian reports:

Mr Justice Bean ordered Mirror Group Newspapers, publisher of the People, to pay an initial £30,000 in damages plus costs of £35,000. The damages payout will rise to £75,000 if the publisher loses permission to take the ruling to the court of appeal.

The allegations were contained in two paragraphs in a crime supplement in the People about Baby P's mother, who had separated from the child's father, referred to in court as KC. They appeared in a 19 September 2010 article headed "Tortured to death as mum turned a blind eye"...

Bean said in his written judgment: "It is difficult to think of any charge more calculated to lead to the revulsion and condemnation of a person's fellow citizens than the rape of a 14-year-old girl."

KC said in his witness statement that he was "shocked and upset beyond words" by the false libel, which he first learned about in phone calls from close friends.

The judge said the appropriate starting point for the damages was £150,000. But he reduced this by half, to £75,000 because Mirror Group Newspapers moved swiftly to apologise and correct the error.

The Independent added:

Heather Rogers QC, appearing for MGN [Mirror Group Newspapers], told the High Court hearing: "This was a mistake that MGN regrets and it has apologised to the claimant, and I repeat that apology on its behalf in this court."

However, she denied KC had been badly treated, or that MGN had conducted any kind of "campaign" against him, or dismissed his legitimate complaint.

Today, Ms Rogers argued that MGN should be allowed to appeal on the grounds that the compensation order was too high and "disproportionate". 

The People apologises to Charlotte Church

Three weeks after the event but, coincidentally, one day before she appeared at the Leveson Inquiry, the People published an apology to Charlotte Church over the false claim that she had drunkenly proposed to her boyfriend:

On November 6, 2011, we said Charlotte Church had proposed marriage to Jonathan Powell at a boozy karaoke night at the Robin Hood pub in Cardiff. We were misinformed.

On the night in question Ms Church and Mr Powell were performing a gig at studios in Pentyrch, Cardiff and Ms Church did not propose that night or at all.

We are happy to set the record straight and we apologise for our mistake.

However, in her evidence to the Leveson Inquiry, Church and her lawyer made clear this wasn't necessarily the end of the story. Church said:

we didn't just want a normal run-of-the-mill apology because it's just not good enough

David Sherborne added:

What Ms Church was saying, though, was that with the apology -- and it was a unilateral one, and that's obviously a matter that's of wider interest to the Inquiry in terms of what the appropriate form of redress is -- the apology she was seeking in agreed terms was also the answers to a number of questions which are rather similar to those questions Ms Patry Hoskins had put about how it was this story was written and how there are quotes from Ms Church and her partner, given that this is all entirely fabricated.

Church also raised the issue of how her statement denying the story was treated by the media:

I gave a statement saying that it was a complete fabrication and that this was a case -- you know, this was an exact reason why this Leveson Inquiry is happening and how it's out of control and it simply shouldn't be allowed to happen, and part of my statement which was basically the denial was printed in a few publications. 

Most of -- most of the rest of it, the stronger parts of the statement, were just totally ignored and in one instance -- I think it might have been the Press Association who basically wrote back when we'd given the statement, saying, "We can't print this whole statement because our consumers don't like to hear anything negative about us or our conduct."

Charlotte Church calls 'marriage proposal' story a 'complete fabrication'

On Sunday, The People reported:

Charlotte Church has proposed to her boyfriend Jonathan Powell during a boozy pub karaoke night.

The star belted out The Ronettes’ Be My Baby then slumped in a chair next to her man and gave him a huge kiss. She told him: “That was for you because I want you to be my baby. Will you marry me?”

He replied: “Yes but I don’t want to be known as Mr Church.”

The pair, both 25, then ordered bottles of champagne “one each” and celebrated into the early hours of last Saturday morning at the pub, the Robin Hood in Cardiff.

A friend said: “Jonathan was thrilled and Charlotte was very happy. She was singing I’m Getting ­Married in the Morning as we helped her to the taxi afterwards.”

The story was quickly picked up by other media outlets. The Sun published it on page 11 of today's paper, under the headline 'Charlotte pops the question', adding another element to the story:

Charlotte Church FORGOT she had proposed to her boyfriend after drunkenly popping the question at a karaoke night. 

The singer and TV host told pals it wasn't until sobering up the next day that she remembered publicly asking Jonathan Powell to marry her.

The Mail's website churned out its own version, repeating the 'too drunk to remember' line:

But the Sun's online article has been replaced by a 404 Error and the Mail's story has vanished. Instead, the Mail is now reporting something else about Church - her denial of the story:

"This story is a complete fabrication. I have not proposed to my boyfriend, drunkenly or otherwise. It is embarrassing for me (and him) for our families and friends to read that I have.

I was not in the pub they mention on the night they allege this happened. I haven't been there for 5 months. At the time that I was apparently drunkenly proposing I was in fact performing in a completely different town with a large public audience.

There is literally not one shred of truth in this story, and it is still alarming to me that lies of this scale can be printed. This is not journalism. It's a perfect example of why this out of control tabloid industry needs regulation immediately."

The Mail's new article, however, fails to admit its role, referring instead to 'reports' and a 'story in the Sun'. It also fails to include Church's quotes about 'lies of this scale' and an 'out of control tabloid industry'.

Peanut paste and the 'royal baby'

On 27 April, the Daily Star proclaimed:

But when they said 'Royal baby on way' what they actually meant was 'Andrew Morton's got a book coming out and he thinks Kate might get pregnant within a year'.

Forward to July and the People asked:

The paper said:

The warning comes after reports that Kate, 29, is due to meet her gynaecologist Alan Farthing in the next few weeks to receive fertility advice.

But experts last night told The People that they would urge Kate to pile on the pounds to increase her chances.

On Friday, the Sun had the latest:

A pregnancy riddle, eh? And what's the Sun's evidence for this speculation:

The Duchess of Cambridge was at the centre of a pregnancy riddle last night after refusing to eat peanut paste during a royal engagement.

Kate, 29, turned down the protein snack as she and hubby William joined the Danish Crown Prince and his wife at a famine relief depot. For years government experts urged mums-to-be to avoid peanuts, fearing a link to allergies.

For years they did, but that advice was changed in 2009.

So, she didn't eat some peanut paste. Is that it? Well no, there's an anonymous 'onlooker' too:

One onlooker said: "The Duchess does not have a nut allergy, nor is it like her to appear rude. The only explanation is that she is pregnant and has been told — like many expectant mothers — to avoid nuts."

The 'only explanation'? Not according to the 'senior Palace source' quoted two sentences later:

"Pregnancy is not the only explanation. The Duchess is still new to appearing in front of the cameras at official events.

"It is perfectly plausible that she may not yet feel comfortable eating while the cameras are focused on her. This is not the first time she's turned down food while under the spotlight."

MailOnline repeated the Sun's story on Saturday, and then added an extra detail on Sunday:

The 29-year-old was seen patting or holding her stomach at least a dozen times during a two-hour visit to an aid centre in Copenhagen.

Despite all the cameras, the Mail has only published one photo of her doing this.  

Still, perhaps the Sunday papers could shed some light. The Daily Star Sunday said:

Despite the headline, the article stated:

Kate and Wills have chosen a posh palace as the dream home for their prospective baby...

The official announcement of their change of address adds to speculation Kate, 29, is pregnant – or will be soon.

But The People was adamant: Kate is not pregnant:

Prince William and wife Kate Middleton have ­decided against having their first child until after the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee, The People can ­reveal.

Speculation that Kate, 29, is pregnant after refusing to eat ­peanut butter ­during a royal ­engagement in Demark was firmly quashed yesterday.

And The People can confirm the couple have put off plans to have children until after June 2012 ­ because they do not want to overshadow the Jubilee celebrations.

So she might be pregnant. Or she might be not be. Once she is, it's likely we're going to find out officially. Do we really have to have endless speculation until that time?

Old stories become front page news

The lead story on the front page of Sunday's People is about Shem Davies, who has become a grandad at the age of 29. It is, they say, an 'exclusive':

But can they really claim it is an 'exclusive' when the Sun reported on Shem's family two weeks ago, on 15 July?


It's not the only example of a tabloid splashing an old story on its front page in the past week.

On Thursday, MailOnline published an article about Naomi Jacobs, a woman in her thirties who woke up one day thinking she was 15:

Naomi's story of suffering with transient global amnesia was picked up by the Sun for Friday's front page:
It's an interesting story.

Indeed, the Independent newspaper thought it so interesting they published an article about it back on 14 June.

The People misleads on William's 'stag do'

The People claims it has a 'picture exclusive' on its front page today:


The implication, of course, is that these are pictures from Prince William's stag do, in advance of his wedding on Friday. The article begins:

He kept his stag do top secret, but these are the antics Prince William can get up to when he really lets his hair down.

Our world exclusive pictures show Wills the student larking around with TWO feather boas while in his boxer shorts.

Then they reveal:

The prince gyrated in front of a girl pal during the wild 21st birthday party of James Tollemache, the son of a lord...

It was December 2002, when 20-year-old Wills was on the Christmas break of his second year at the University of St Andrews – but had yet to start dating Kate Middleton.

So The People has dug up photos that are over eight years old, stuck them on the front page at a time when interest in Prince William is so high and given the strong impression they are new. It seems The People has been picking up tips on front page 'exclusives' from the Daily Star.

Will at The Media Blog says this isn't a 'world exclusive' either:

...the pictures, taken at a friend's 21st birthday party, circulated widely online in 2002 and appeared in a number of overseas publications at the time.

Fleet Street Blues, a blog which bills itself as the 'insider scoop on journalism' wrote about this front page late last night, before seeing the article, and suggested:

We haven't even looked at the other papers yet, but something tell us the People's exclusive pictures from Prince William's stag do are a shoe-in for the Sunday Scoop. This week or any other week.

If they fell for it, how many others were also fooled? As The Media Blog adds:

The degree to which this cover attempts to mislead readers suggests The People should actually be answerable to Trading Standards rather than the PCC on this one.

Apology from The People

On Sunday, The People published the following apology to Denise Welch and Tim Healy:

On 8 August 2010 we published an article about a charity event held in aid of the Children's Heart Unit at the Freeman Hospital. We said that Denise Welch gave an interview to us about personal issues concerning her marriage to Tim Healy.

We accept that she did not say those things to us and we apologise to both of them for what was published.

(via Press Gazette)

Sorry we called you a stalker (cont.)

In December, Barry George won substantial libel damages from Rupert Murdoch's News Group Newspapers because the Sun and News of the World continued to imply he was a murderer and stalker even after he was cleared of killing Jill Dando.

Today, George won an apology and libel damages from the Mirror Group, after all three of its papers - the Mirror, Sunday Mirror and People - wrote, in 2008, that:

Mr George had threatened to pester and harass Ms [Cheryl] Cole and her colleagues so he could meet the Girls Aloud singer and X Factor judge.

It was also claimed Mr George had downloaded pictures of Sky presenter Ms Burley, and said that he loved her and she loved him.

And so:

MGN agreed to pay substantial damages and Mr George's costs, and Emily Barber, solicitor for the newspaper group, said that it apologised for any hurt and distress caused to him.

In the Mirror's own words:

In an article we published on our website in October 2008, we alleged that Barry George had been paying an excessive and worrying interest in the Sky TV presenter Kay Burley. We accept that those allegations were false. We take this opportunity to apologise to Mr George for any upset and hurt he felt.

What both these payouts show is that all these newspapers believed they knew better than the courts. Despite his acquittal, they were determind to smear George and continued to imply he was guilty after all.

Apologies round-up

From Regret the Error, a few recent newspaper apologies.

The Mirror - sorry for mixing up victim and perpetrator in stabbing:

On 19 June 2008 we reported that Britain's Next Top Model finalist Jasmia Robinson's unnamed boyfriend, was in custody for allegedly stabbing a suspected love rival.

We wish to make clear that her boyfriend David Obanobi was in fact the victim of the knife attack and not the perpetrator and was not in custody.

We apologise to Mr Obanobi for the distress and embarrassment caused.

The People - sorry for using a photo of the wrong house:

On 20 December 2009 we published a story about Caroline Cartwight breaching her Asbo for noisy sex. However, the picture of her house was of a neighbouring property and the description of the house as 'an end of terrace' is incorrect.

We are happy to set the record straight and apologise to Mrs Marjorie Ball for the error.

The Express (Scottish edition) - sorry for lying and invading your privacy

On January 18, 2010, we published an article within the Scottish Daily Express concerning the recent purchase of a property by author JK Rowling, entitled 'Party must’ve been wizard – Rowling pays GBP 300,000 extra to move straight into new mansion'.

In it we published two photographs of the inside of Ms Rowling’s new property. Further, we alleged Ms Rowling offered GBP 300,000 on top of the purchase price in order for the seller to vacate the property within two weeks so that she could hold a Christmas Party there, and, that Ms Rowling viewed only two rooms in the property before deciding to purchase it.

Not only do we now accept that our article was false and wholly inaccurate, we also acknowledge that we should not have invaded Ms Rowling’s privacy, and that of her family, by publishing photographs depicting the interior of her new property.

We apologise to Ms Rowling and her family for any distress that our article may have caused.

The Mirror (and the Guardian) - sorry for saying your school is full of bullies:

On Monday last, under the headline 'Saoirse: Pupils weren’t Lovely to me', we reported remarks attributed to actor Saoirse Ronan concerning her experience at school in which it was stated that pupils, teachers and staff at school gave her a hard time.

We identified the school wrongly as being Kilkenny College. We acknowledge that, contrary to our report, Saoirse Ronan is not a pupil of Kilkenny College and has never enrolled as a pupil or attended classes there.

We accept that the remarks were not made concerning any teacher, staff-member or pupil at Kilkenny College and we apologise to them for associating them with this story and for any upset or embarrassment caused as a result.

We accept that Kilkenny College is an educational institution which guards the interests of all its pupils with care and we withdraw any suggestion to the contrary in our report. We are happy to correct the position.

And, not yet on Regret the Error but sure to be soon...The Telegraph - sorry we implied you were a bit racist:

In our article “Newsreader sues ITV for colleague's 'racist mimicking'" (22 Nov 09), which referred to an Employment Tribunal claim brought by Lisa Aziz against ITV, we repeated allegations made by Ms Aziz against Steve Scott, the ITV newsreader, including an allegation that Mr Scott had made racially discriminatory remarks about some of his colleagues.

For the avoidance of doubt, we wish to make clear that we did not in any way seek to adopt or endorse any of the claims made against ITV or the allegations made against Mr Scott in particular. As referred to in our article, following an internal investigation by ITV - which it described as “full and thorough” - Mr Scott was cleared of the allegations made against him. We apologise to Mr Scott for any distress caused by any contrary impression our article may have given.

The wit and wisdom of Eamonn Holmes

From today's unmissable column:

There was a lot of bird watching in the North East of England last week... and it had nothing to do with Jordan's book-signing in Newcastle.

Which needs to be followed by this.

Eamonn Holmes can't think for himself

In Sunday's People, Eamonn Holmes became the latest ignorant 'journalist' to repeat the completely untrue 'immigrant saved from deportation by his cat' story. He writes:

If you are an illegal immigrant facing deportation from the UK then don't worry - just tell the authorities that you have a cat and they will let you stay.

Well, they won't, because that isn't what happened, but do go on...

That was the case for a Bolivian man who was due to be sent home. Then judges ruled that deporting him would breach his human rights by interfering with his family life - his family being his girlfriend and a cat.

Well, that wasn't 'the case' at all. But do go on...

I can see the signs as you enter Dover: "A cat is for life not just for Christmas... in fact it's for a whole new life. Welcome to Britain."

Invented signs for an invented story. Brilliant. How does he do it?

The story, incidentally, was debunked by Donal McIntyre - and the man's lawyer - on BBC Radio Five Live on Sunday.

How many more times is it going to be repeated before columnists and journalists do the slightest bit of research and find out it's rubbish?

And isn't it clearer than ever than Littlejohn, Platell, Holmes and their ilk just regurgitate crap they have read in other papers, with a few spiteful comments and woeful attempts at humour added. No independent thinking or common sense or research required.

With Holmes, you doubt the readers even got to the cat bit however. After all, he began his column with the striking revelation:

Funerals are always sad occasions

Most people should have given up right there.

Sorry we said your relationship was in trouble (twice)

From yesterday's People:

On 25 May 2008 and 3 May 2009 we reported that Michael Essien had cheated on his long term girlfriend Nadia Buari by having numerous affairs behind her back including one in which he fathered a child.

On 3 May we reported that as a result of his behaviour Ms Buari called their wedding off.

We now accept that these allegations are untrue.

We apologise to Mr Essien for any distress or embarassment caused.

Sorry we called you a hanger-on

From yesterday's People, an apology to David Gest:

On July 5, 2009 we reported that David Gest had been banned from attending Michael Jackson's memorial service by Michael's mother as a "hanger-on" who had not spoken to her son for 10 years. Our article was incorrect.

In fact Mr Gest had been friends with Michael Jackson for over 40 years, the two had remained close and he had been personally invited to the memorial service by Mrs Jackson.

We apologise to Mr Gest for our error and any distress or embarrassment it may have caused.

Two more false stories Katie and Peter

The People has paid undisclosed libel damages to Peter Andre over untrue claims he made 'inappropriate sexual advances to a woman who looked like his estranged wife'.

Meanwhile, in other Jordan-related news, the Star was up to its old tricks yesterday, with its totally misleading front page headline. It's hard to believe people are still interested in this saga, but it must sell papers or they wouldn't bother. Anyway Jordan lover's £2m drug bust implied Alex Reid was involved in criminal activity. The first paragraph didn't dispel that impression:

Jordan's new lover Alex Reid was arrested and quizzed by police in a massive drugs ring bust centred on his gym, the Daily Star can reveal.

Except, half way through the story it admits:

the police soon realised Alex and others had nothing to do with drugs or crime.

Definitely worth a front page, that one.

The People considers name change to The Person

If you buy the People on 5 July, you might just find one or two stories about Michael Jackson (click to enlarge image).

Jade-watch (sorry)

Trinity Mirror newspapers make a mockery of themselves and the whole Jade Goody feeding frenzy with this nonsense. An 'exclusive' on the Mirror site dated 14 March 2009:











'Can no longer speak'? So how come the next day, sister paper The People led with her, ummm, talking:










Worth reading - Terence Blacker's column on 'Saint' Max Clifford and a review of Clifford's autobiography.