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.
Showing posts with label sun. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sun. Show all posts
Wednesday, 10 April 2013
The Sun's prison/hospital confusion
An apology published by The Sun:
Labels:
apology,
correction,
sun
Thursday, 14 March 2013
The Sun vs Gordon Brown (cont.)
This apology to Gordon Brown appeared in today's Sun:
This is the fifth time that the paper has corrected claims about Brown in less than five months.
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.
Labels:
apology,
correction,
political bias,
sun
Sunday, 10 March 2013
Pregnancy 'news' round up
Most of the tabloid newspapers put yet more royal baby news on their front pages on 6 March:
The Sun's front page makes it very clear - the Duchess of Cambridge was handed a teddy bear and said:
The same quote was used elsewhere.
Two days later and the Mail published a follow-up:
She didn't? With the help of a video of the incident, the Mail reveals that she actually said:
In other words: not much like what was originally reported. Curiously, this didn't make the front pages.
Meanwhile, in other 'pregnancy news', the Daily Star ran the headline 'Mystery of 'pregnant' star Cheryl Cole' on its front page on Saturday.
Here's what happened: a pregnant woman went to see Cheryl Cole in concert. 'So nice to see lovely @CherylCole', she tweeted. Cheryl replied: 'Nice to see you too, you look amazing pregnant'.
The 'mystery' is that anyone thought this meant Cheryl was pregnant, or that this was worthy of a place on the front page of a paper.
The Sun's front page makes it very clear - the Duchess of Cambridge was handed a teddy bear and said:
"Thank you, I will take that for my d...for my baby"
The same quote was used elsewhere.
Two days later and the Mail published a follow-up:
She didn't? With the help of a video of the incident, the Mail reveals that she actually said:
"Is this for us? Awww, thank you so much, it's [very] very sweet of you"
In other words: not much like what was originally reported. Curiously, this didn't make the front pages.
Meanwhile, in other 'pregnancy news', the Daily Star ran the headline 'Mystery of 'pregnant' star Cheryl Cole' on its front page on Saturday.
Here's what happened: a pregnant woman went to see Cheryl Cole in concert. 'So nice to see lovely @CherylCole', she tweeted. Cheryl replied: 'Nice to see you too, you look amazing pregnant'.
The 'mystery' is that anyone thought this meant Cheryl was pregnant, or that this was worthy of a place on the front page of a paper.
Labels:
express,
mail,
mirror,
misleading headlines,
Star,
sun,
the royals
Friday, 22 February 2013
Derren Brown challenges Sun 'exclusive'
A Sun 'exclusive' published on 18 February revealed:
Just because he thinks it's interesting, doesn't mean it's going to happen, despite the Sun's headline:
In response, Brown tweeted:
(hat-tip to Chris)
Telly illusionist Derren Brown is planning his most mind-blowing trick — turning a straight man GAY.
The hypnotist also thinks he can use his powers to make a gay man fancy women.
He hopes his latest stunt will be as big a hit with viewers as last year’s Derren Brown: Apocalypse.
Derren, 41, who came out as gay four years ago, said: “I was thinking about this the other day — it would be interesting wouldn’t it? To take a gay guy and make him straight and a straight guy and make him gay.”
Just because he thinks it's interesting, doesn't mean it's going to happen, despite the Sun's headline:
In response, Brown tweeted:
(hat-tip to Chris)
Labels:
'exclusive',
sun,
twitter
Tuesday, 12 February 2013
Sorry we said you were an extremist
This clarification was published by the Sun on 7 December 2012:
In a story headlined "Lad of 12 leader of Cornish liberators" (Oct 23) we stated that Cornish extremists had recruited a 12-year-old boy to run a division of their "liberation army".
We are happy to clarify that the Mid Cornwall Liberation Army, an outdoors adventure group run by the boy and his friends, has nothing to do with the militant Cornish National Liberation Army.
Labels:
clarification,
correction,
sun
Sunday, 10 February 2013
Billy Connolly denies claims in Sun 'exclusive'
The Sun, 3 August 2012:
Billy Connolly, interviewed in the Independent on Sunday, 16 December 2012:
EXCLUSIVE: Dressing down for film lothario Russell Brand
Sex-mad comic Russell Brand was told off by Billy Connolly after he refused to start filming until a wardrobe girl flashed her boobs at him.
His cheeky demand delayed shooting on the first day for two hours, so the assistant eventually gave in for the sake of the schedule.
Randy Russell, 37, who’s had a stint in sex rehab, was filming Eric Idle’s musical What About Dick? in LA with fellow comedians Billy, 69, and Eddie Izzard, 50. A source said: “It was just a bit of fun.”
But Billy failed to see the funny side. The source added: “Billy got annoyed when he found out and and gave Russell a stern ticking off.”
Russell caused chaos when he pulled the stunt in his dressing room.
The source recalled: “Russell tried to persuade a wardrobe assistant to show him her breasts but she was having none of it — at first.
“But when it started to look like they weren’t going to get any work done she gave in and flashed him. Russell is a charming scoundrel and everybody let him get away with murder on set — except Billy.
“But after their heart-to-heart he settled down and gave a great performance and filmed the scenes like a consummate professional.”
Billy Connolly, interviewed in the Independent on Sunday, 16 December 2012:
"That [widely reported] story," says Connolly evenly, "is a total invention. A complete fabrication. It's total bollocks. It never happened. Russell was very well-behaved, and I found him very interesting."
Labels:
sun
Wednesday, 6 February 2013
The plan to 'scrap' the use of Mr and Mrs...
In October 2012, many column inches were devoted to claims that Brighton and Hove City Council was planning to 'scrap' the terms Mr and Mrs.
The Mirror went with:
The Mail:
The Telegraph:
The Sun's print version carried a photo of Mr and Mrs host Phillip Schofield with a speech bubble saying: 'Welcome to Non Gender and Non Gender', under the headline 'Ban Mr & Mrs!'. Online, the headline was:
There were many other websites that repeated the same claims.
But the story wasn't correct - the Council had not made any recommendations or published any plans at this time. The Council's Trans Equality Scrutiny Panel, who were looking into a range of issues, suggested there was a problem with a set-list of honorifics on online forms - that if you don't select one of the set options, and some trans people do not feel that the titles Mr or Mrs are suitable for them, it could prevent completion of the form. So people could still call themselves Mr or Mrs, but they would have the freedom to choose a title with which they felt most comfortable.
Jane Fae wrote in the Guardian:
The Trans Equality Scrutiny Panel's final report was published in January. Unsurprisingly, it does not recommend scrapping Mr and Mrs, as it explains on page 65:
Three weeks on, and neither the Sun, Mirror, Mail nor Telegraph appear to have informed their readers of what has actually been recommended by the Panel. A search of all four websites using terms 'brighton mx' and 'brighton trans' reveals no new articles on this subject since October.
As the Panel said following the original articles:
(hat-tip to Jane Fae)
The Mirror went with:
The Mail:
The Telegraph:
The Sun's print version carried a photo of Mr and Mrs host Phillip Schofield with a speech bubble saying: 'Welcome to Non Gender and Non Gender', under the headline 'Ban Mr & Mrs!'. Online, the headline was:
There were many other websites that repeated the same claims.
But the story wasn't correct - the Council had not made any recommendations or published any plans at this time. The Council's Trans Equality Scrutiny Panel, who were looking into a range of issues, suggested there was a problem with a set-list of honorifics on online forms - that if you don't select one of the set options, and some trans people do not feel that the titles Mr or Mrs are suitable for them, it could prevent completion of the form. So people could still call themselves Mr or Mrs, but they would have the freedom to choose a title with which they felt most comfortable.
Jane Fae wrote in the Guardian:
They don't identify as male or female, prefer "Mx" (pronounced "Mix") as title of choice, and feel positively excluded by forms that demand they pick from a limited list of gender-specific titles. It's a small exclusion, but why should they have to put up with such when a remedy is so easily implemented?
The Trans Equality Scrutiny Panel's final report was published in January. Unsurprisingly, it does not recommend scrapping Mr and Mrs, as it explains on page 65:
Given recent press coverage of the subject of honorifics, the Panel would like to make clear that they never had any intention of recommending that the use of honorifics should be removed. The recommendation of this report is aimed at giving more choice to those who do not want to identify as Mr/Ms/Mrs/Dr. It is worth noting that this may not just apply to trans people: others may not choose to use a honorific if given the option.
Recommendation 35: The Panel welcome the addition of the honorific Mx by council benefits staff as giving an alternative option. The Panel recommend that all on-line forms are examined to look at the possibility of additional options, leaving blank or entering the title the individual feels is appropriate to them.
Three weeks on, and neither the Sun, Mirror, Mail nor Telegraph appear to have informed their readers of what has actually been recommended by the Panel. A search of all four websites using terms 'brighton mx' and 'brighton trans' reveals no new articles on this subject since October.
As the Panel said following the original articles:
We acknowledge and regret that the tone and content of much of the on-line debate over the last week has caused distress and may have damaged the trust we have sought to build up. We condemn the offensive and discriminatory tone of much of that comment, and reiterate that all members of the panel remain committed to transgender equality. We also recognise the need for balanced, fair and accurate media reporting and will be working proactively to encourage this regarding the scrutiny going forward.
(hat-tip to Jane Fae)
Labels:
mail,
mirror,
pc gone mad,
sun,
telegraph,
transgender
Wednesday, 23 January 2013
The Sun vs Gordon Brown
The Sun, 21 October 2012:
The Sun, 25 October 2012:
The Sun, 18 January 2013:
The Sun, 22 January 2013:
(Huge hat-tip to Tim Fenton at Zelo Street for spotting these.)
In his column “Toffs who play at being comrades” (September 30) Toby Young stated that Gordon Brown now charges £70,000 for an after-dinner speech.
We are happy to clarify that Mr Brown does not receive such money personally, and that all revenue from his speaking engagements goes to fund Mr and Mrs Brown’s charitable work and their involvement in public life.
The Sun, 25 October 2012:
“Brown's duty bill hits £114k” (July 18). We are happy to clarify that Gordon Brown’s allowance goes directly to office and staff costs incurred as a former PM and is not received by him personally. We acknowledge that expenses incurred in staffing are not “earned” as stated. His only personal income is his salary as an MP and he renounced the pension he is entitled to as a former Prime Minister.
The Sun, 18 January 2013:
In an article “Brown in £30,000 expenses row” (Aug 18), based on the Conservative Party’s statements about Gordon Brown’s expenses, we would like to make clear that Mr Brown does not claim for accommodation expenses when visiting London on parliamentary business. We regret any confusion caused.
The Sun, 22 January 2013:
In an article ‘Gordon is browned off’ (Sept 28) we stated that a Gordon Brown press conference in New York was cancelled when only one reporter turned up.
We would like to make it clear that Mr Brown was delayed at an earlier United Nations meeting which overran, paying tribute to Aung San Suu Kyi. We are happy to clarify the position.
(Huge hat-tip to Tim Fenton at Zelo Street for spotting these.)
Labels:
clarification,
correction,
political bias,
sun
Thursday, 20 December 2012
The eagle has crash landed
The day after the 'eagle snatches kid' video was revealed as a hoax - the Telegraph published confirmation of this at 8:12pm on Wednesday - several of the tabloids ran the story in their print editions.
The Express headline read 'Terror in the skies as eagle snatches tot':
Although the article admitted a 'fierce online debate was raging' about whether it was a hoax, the paper calls it a 'terrifying incident' in the third sentence.
The Sun's headline was 'Child's prey':
Like the Express, it reports on the fact that 'some' had 'questioned whether the incident...was real or a CGI fake.' But at the top of the story, the Sun says:
The Star went with 'The eagle has landed a tot!':
It does include the truth that 'the clip turned out to be a...computer-generated fake' but this appears to be a late addition, as the rest of the story is written as if it is genuine - including, on the right of the page:
(Pictures from Jonathan Haynes, posted on Twitter)
The Express headline read 'Terror in the skies as eagle snatches tot':
Although the article admitted a 'fierce online debate was raging' about whether it was a hoax, the paper calls it a 'terrifying incident' in the third sentence.
The Sun's headline was 'Child's prey':
Like the Express, it reports on the fact that 'some' had 'questioned whether the incident...was real or a CGI fake.' But at the top of the story, the Sun says:
Dad's horror as golden eagle swoops on his toddler son in park and tries to carry him away
The Star went with 'The eagle has landed a tot!':
It does include the truth that 'the clip turned out to be a...computer-generated fake' but this appears to be a late addition, as the rest of the story is written as if it is genuine - including, on the right of the page:
'What do you think? Check out the video at www.dailystar.co.uk'
(Pictures from Jonathan Haynes, posted on Twitter)
Labels:
express,
fake images,
Star,
sun
Saturday, 1 December 2012
Leveson on the 'tendency to sexualise and demean women'
One phrase that unexpectedly appears in the Leveson Report is (p.664):
It is a quote from a 'story' published by the Daily Star on 15 November 2011:
The 'story' says:
This was submitted to Leveson by the organisation OBJECT as one example (among many) of the objectification of women in the media.
Referring to the Star, Sun and Sport, Lord Justice Leveson pointed out (p.664):
He concluded (p.664):
massive pervy eyeful
It is a quote from a 'story' published by the Daily Star on 15 November 2011:
The 'story' says:
Sam's a bit of a ski bum
We assume you're not even reading this because you're still getting a massive pervy eyeful of that pert ass going up a fake ski slope.
But if you have managed to tear your bum-filled eyeballs away, you will realise the owner of those tight buns is TOWIE babe Sam Faiers, 20.
She showed off her impressive, er, snow plough on a family day out at Brentwood Ski Centre in her Essex hood.
This was submitted to Leveson by the organisation OBJECT as one example (among many) of the objectification of women in the media.
Referring to the Star, Sun and Sport, Lord Justice Leveson pointed out (p.664):
all three titles contained what can only be described as objectifying material. All three included numerous articles with no other purpose except to show an image of a scantily clad or topless woman...
All three titles included articles with no purpose other than to attach a photograph of, and describe in derogatory language, a woman’s breasts or bottom...
All three contained large scale advertisements for pornography and/or escort services. And all three included articles which appeared to eroticise violence against women.
He concluded (p.664):
The evidence as a whole suggested that there is force in the trenchant views expressed by the groups and organisations who testified to the Inquiry that the Page 3 tabloid press often failed to show consistent respect for the dignity and equality of women generally, and that there was a tendency to sexualise and demean women. That failure is particularly clear in the pages of the Sport, which is, in my view, hardly distinguishable from the admittedly ‘softer’ end of top-shelf pornography. But it exists to a lesser degree in the Daily Star and The Sun. For The Sun, at least, it is a failure of consistency, rather than a general failure to show respect for women. The Sun has campaigned admirably against domestic violence, rape, and size zero models.[373] But it is clear that those campaigns have, perhaps uncomfortably, sat alongside demeaning and sexualising representations of women.
Labels:
daily sport,
leveson inquiry,
objectifying women,
Star,
sun
Friday, 30 November 2012
Leveson on the 'discriminatory, sensational or unbalanced' reporting of minority groups
One interesting but overlooked section of the Leveson Report has been about the representation of minorities.
On the treatment of the trans community, for example, Leveson writes (p.668):
The section on ethnic minorities, asylum seekers and immigrants is also critical of parts of the press. Leveson states (p.668) that:
For example:
The report outlines several other examples (there are lots to choose from) such as 'Muslim Only Public Loos', 'Terror Target Sugar', 'Brave Heroes Hounded Out' and 'Muslim Plot To Kill Pope'.
Leveson concludes (p.671):
Moving on to reporting of immigration issues, Leveson begins by saying (p.671):
He then outlines some examples of poor journalism, including 'Swan Bake', 'Asylum Seekers Eat Our Donkeys' and 'Failed asylum seeker who has dodged deportation for a decade told he can stay...because he goes to the GYM' all of which were untrue.
Leveson found (p.673):
And (p.672):
His conclusion is damning (p.673):
On the treatment of the trans community, for example, Leveson writes (p.668):
On the basis of the evidence seen by the Inquiry, it is clear that there is a marked tendency in a section of the press to fail to treat members of the transgender and intersex communities with sufficient dignity and respect; and in instances where individuals are identified either expressly or by necessary implication perpetrate breaches of clause 12 of the Code. Parts of the tabloid press continue to seek to ‘out’ transgender people notwithstanding its prohibition in the Editors’ Code. And parts of the tabloid press continue to refer to the transgender community in derogatory terms, holding transgender people up for ridicule, or denying the legitimacy of their condition. Although the Inquiry heard evidence that parts of the tabloid press had “raised [its] game in terms of transgender reporting”,[393] the examples provided by TMW of stories from the last year demonstrate that the game needs to be raised significantly higher.
The section on ethnic minorities, asylum seekers and immigrants is also critical of parts of the press. Leveson states (p.668) that:
the identification of Muslims, migrants, asylum seekers and gypsies/travellers as the targets of press hostility and/or xenophobia in the press, was supported by the evidence seen by the Inquiry.
For example:
the following headlines, which appeared to have little factual basis but which may have contributed to a negative perception of Muslims in the UK: ‘Muslim Schools Ban Our Culture’; ‘BBC Puts Muslims Before You!’; ‘Christmas is Banned: It Offends Muslims’; ‘Brit Kids Forced to Eat Halal School Dinners!’; ‘Muslims Tell Us How To Run Our Schools’.
The report outlines several other examples (there are lots to choose from) such as 'Muslim Only Public Loos', 'Terror Target Sugar', 'Brave Heroes Hounded Out' and 'Muslim Plot To Kill Pope'.
Leveson concludes (p.671):
The evidence demonstrates that sections of the press betray a tendency, which is far from being universal or even preponderant, to portray Muslims in a negative light.
Moving on to reporting of immigration issues, Leveson begins by saying (p.671):
The tendency identified in the preceding paragraph is not limited to the representation of Muslims and applies in a similar way to some other minority ethnic groups.
He then outlines some examples of poor journalism, including 'Swan Bake', 'Asylum Seekers Eat Our Donkeys' and 'Failed asylum seeker who has dodged deportation for a decade told he can stay...because he goes to the GYM' all of which were untrue.
Leveson found (p.673):
evidence suggested that, in relation to reporting on Muslims, immigrants and asylum seekers, there was a tendency for some titles to adopt a sensationalist mode of reporting intended to support a world-view rather than to report a story. The evidence given by the Irish Traveller Movement in Britain suggested a similar approach to gypsy and traveller issues.
And (p.672):
It is one thing for a newspaper to take the view that immigration should be reduced, or that the asylum and/or human rights system should be reformed, and to report on true stories which support those political views. It is another thing to misreport stories either wilfully or reckless as to their truth or accuracy, in order to ensure that they support those political views. And it does appear that certain parts of the press do, on occasion, prioritise the political stance of the title over the accuracy of the story.
His conclusion is damning (p.673):
Nonetheless, when assessed as a whole, the evidence of discriminatory, sensational or unbalanced reporting in relation to ethnic minorities, immigrants and/or asylum seekers, is concerning. The press can have significant influence over community relations and the way in which parts of society perceive other parts. While newspapers are entitled to express strong views on minority issues, immigration and asylum, it is important that stories on those issues are accurate, and are not calculated to exacerbate community divisions or increase resentment. Although the majority of the press appear to discharge this responsibility with care, there are enough examples of careless or reckless reporting to conclude that discriminatory, sensational or unbalanced reporting in relation to ethnic minorities, immigrants and/or asylum seekers is a feature of journalistic practice in parts of the press, rather than an aberration.
Labels:
asylum,
express,
immigration,
islam,
mail,
muslims,
Star,
sun,
transgender
Tuesday, 20 November 2012
When the Sun identified an innocent man as a paedophile...
From Private Eye, Issue 1327:
(Via Primly Stable) (See also the BBC's news report)
"Fury erupted last night after it emerged ex-director-general George Entwistle will get a £450,000 payoff," seethed the Sun.
"The blundering boss managed to negotiate a year's salary in lieu of notice when he quit on Saturday, despite his contract only entitling him to six months."
Entwistle's payoff is small change compared to the £7m pocketed by the Sun's own blundering boss, chief executive Rebekah Brooks, when she belatedly resigned over her role in the company's dliatory and deceitful reaction to phone-hacking allegations.
While the paper has never mentioned the "fury" aroused by her reward for failure, an editorial made it very clear what it feels about Entwistle: "there was no way BBC Director General George Entwistle could have survived after the Newsnight paedophile scandal."
In fact there is a precedent Entwistle could have cited had he chose to hang on. Back in March 2003, the Sun printed a photograph of a man it claimed had been convicted of sex offences against children, under the enormous headline "FACE OF KID BAN PERVERT" - only to find that he was an unrelated and innocent man who had to leave his home and was put under police protection.
By coincidence the paper had only been edited by Rebekah Wade (as she then was) for a couple of months. Did she take responsibility and immediately resign? Er, no - not even when the Sun was forced to print two apologies, pay damages and take out adverts in the local press where the man lived to asssure neighbours of his innocence.
(Via Primly Stable) (See also the BBC's news report)
Labels:
hypocrisy,
rebekah brooks,
sun
Sunday, 18 November 2012
Sun admits single Italian isn't Bulgarian father-of-seven
On 13 October, the Sun published the following apology:
The Sun's website still carries the photo:
However, the caption has now been changed to:
Now that they know that the single Italian in the photo isn't the Bulgarian father-of-seven.
Salvatore Quero
In a story headlined ‘Greedy Bulgars’ (September 11), Salvatore Quero, a single Italian man, was identifiable in a photograph as part of a Bulgarian family claiming benefits.
We are happy to clarify that Mr Quero is not a member of the family and was simply providing them with food.
The Sun's website still carries the photo:
However, the caption has now been changed to:
Benefits takeaway ... concerned male passer-by helps family enjoy food from McDonald's.
Now that they know that the single Italian in the photo isn't the Bulgarian father-of-seven.
Labels:
correction,
immigration,
sun
Monday, 22 October 2012
A murder in Turkey
The following borrows heavily from a blogost by Jane Fae.
Jane looked at the coverage of Chris Collier and his conviction, in Turkey, for the murder of his wife.
The headlines in the UK media included:
Two things stand out from these headlines from the Sun, Mail and Metro. First, it is stated as fact that Julia Collier 'was born a man'. Second, the use of 'after he discovered' implies that there is a link between the murder and this 'discovery'.
But are either of these things true? After all, the Sentinel in Staffordshire (where Collier lived before emigrating) and an English-language newspaper in Turkey reported the conviction without reference to Julia being 'born a man'.
Jane Fae suggests this angle may have come to prominence in 2010 in an article in the Daily Star by Jerry Lawton. It said:
The forum in question is the Kusadasi Fans Forum. There, in 2006, someone using the screen-name 'chriscollier' wrote:
In their replies, the forum moderators pointed out that this person was posting from an IP in Leeds. Not from Kusadasi, Turkey. The user was banned after posting only 11 comments.
It is very difficult - maybe impossible - to know who posted this comment and yet this appears to be the origin of, and only piece of evidence for, the 'she used to be a man' claim.
If we imagine that Collier did actually write that comment in 2006 and the murder took place in 2010, the way the headlines have linked both events appears problematic.
But the possibility that he 'was being taunted by someone posing as him' in this comment certainly raises questions about the recent coverage.
Moreover, the claim he 'bought' his wife and 'then moved to Kusadasi' is at odds with the statement from a friend quoted in most of the articles, who says:
It is not clear if the trans claim is true and, even if it is, whether it was the motive. It appears that all the articles making these claims - which the local paper in Staffs, and a paper in Turkey did not repeat - are relying on a six-year-old comment on a forum that could have been written by anyone.
(Hat-tip to Jane for her detective work)
Jane looked at the coverage of Chris Collier and his conviction, in Turkey, for the murder of his wife.
The headlines in the UK media included:
Two things stand out from these headlines from the Sun, Mail and Metro. First, it is stated as fact that Julia Collier 'was born a man'. Second, the use of 'after he discovered' implies that there is a link between the murder and this 'discovery'.
But are either of these things true? After all, the Sentinel in Staffordshire (where Collier lived before emigrating) and an English-language newspaper in Turkey reported the conviction without reference to Julia being 'born a man'.
Jane Fae suggests this angle may have come to prominence in 2010 in an article in the Daily Star by Jerry Lawton. It said:
Police are examining postings in an internet forum used by expat Brits from someone claiming to be Collier.
One said: “I paid for my wife and then moved to Kusadasi in my rented apartment.”
The blogger added that Julia “used to be a bloke”.
Police are trying to establish if Collier himself posted the message or was being taunted by someone posing as him.
The forum in question is the Kusadasi Fans Forum. There, in 2006, someone using the screen-name 'chriscollier' wrote:
I paid for my wife, and then moved to kusadasi in my rented appartment, my wife julia who may i add used to be a bloke sings in the koramar and she brings me hours of happenis. What you all reckon then. I want your views.
In their replies, the forum moderators pointed out that this person was posting from an IP in Leeds. Not from Kusadasi, Turkey. The user was banned after posting only 11 comments.
It is very difficult - maybe impossible - to know who posted this comment and yet this appears to be the origin of, and only piece of evidence for, the 'she used to be a man' claim.
If we imagine that Collier did actually write that comment in 2006 and the murder took place in 2010, the way the headlines have linked both events appears problematic.
But the possibility that he 'was being taunted by someone posing as him' in this comment certainly raises questions about the recent coverage.
Moreover, the claim he 'bought' his wife and 'then moved to Kusadasi' is at odds with the statement from a friend quoted in most of the articles, who says:
"Julia was just the nicest girl you could ever meet. She was a singer, and she used to perform at the Korumar Hotel in Kusadasi. That is where they met."
It is not clear if the trans claim is true and, even if it is, whether it was the motive. It appears that all the articles making these claims - which the local paper in Staffs, and a paper in Turkey did not repeat - are relying on a six-year-old comment on a forum that could have been written by anyone.
(Hat-tip to Jane for her detective work)
Labels:
jerry lawton,
mail,
metro,
Star,
sun,
transgender
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:
On 25 September, the Sun published this apology:
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:
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."
Labels:
apology,
damages,
gordon smart,
sun
Sunday, 23 September 2012
Sun reports on 'wonder pill' that 'flights flab'
A couple of weeks after research was published about spin and medical reporting, The Sun reports on a 'wonder pill' that fights 'tummy flab':
Any media report that includes the term 'wonder pill' should be treated with caution. The Sun's Health and Science Editor Emma Little writes:
One look at the product website reveals a key caveat in the claim about fighting flab:
'May'. But the 'healthy diet and exercise' are probably more important to weight management.
The US website is even more revealing. It claims the pill:
But a note at the end of the page reveals what those symbols mean:
The statement about 'weight management programs' is also marked with a ^ on the US site.
It is also worth noting a 2011 judgement from the Complaints Resolution Panel of Australia's Thereutic Products Advertising Complaints. It upheld complaints about claims on www.bergamet.com:
'Unwarranted and unrealistic expectations' may also result from a newspaper report lauding it as a 'wonder pill'.
Any media report that includes the term 'wonder pill' should be treated with caution. The Sun's Health and Science Editor Emma Little writes:
A wonder pill to fight belly fat hit the UK yesterday.
The drug — made from a vile-tasting fruit — is also a breakthrough in the war on cholesterol.
It contains concentrated juice from the intensely bitter bergamot — which is used in cooking in Calabria, southern Italy. Heart experts intrigued by locals there rarely suffering coronary disease claim to have traced it to the fruit.
Analysis revealed it is packed with chemicals called polyphenols.
These work together to open up arteries and increase blood flow — helping the body to burn fat more efficiently.
Tiny amounts of the juice cut blood sugar levels by a fifth in tests, boosting people’s metabolisms so they carried less belly fat.
Meanwhile, the juice was found to lower artery-clogging cholesterol by almost a THIRD. And the fruit raised levels of “good” cholesterol.
The new pills, costing £42 a month and called BergaMet, are taken twice a day before a meal. They have NO side-effects — unlike cholesterol-fighting statins, which can cause muscle weakness and memory loss. That means the pills could be an alternative.
One look at the product website reveals a key caveat in the claim about fighting flab:
May support weight management programs in conjunction with a healthy diet and exercise
'May'. But the 'healthy diet and exercise' are probably more important to weight management.
The US website is even more revealing. It claims the pill:
Helps maintain healthy cholesterol levels in normal healthy individuals^*
But a note at the end of the page reveals what those symbols mean:
^ These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.
* Levels already within normal limits.
The statement about 'weight management programs' is also marked with a ^ on the US site.
It is also worth noting a 2011 judgement from the Complaints Resolution Panel of Australia's Thereutic Products Advertising Complaints. It upheld complaints about claims on www.bergamet.com:
The advertiser did not respond to the particulars of the complaint, but stated that as a result of the complaint the website was under review...
In the absence of any evidence from the advertiser, the Panel was satisfied that the advertisement contained many representations that were likely to arouse unwarranted and unrealistic expectations in relation to the advertised product. These included the representations that the advertised product has benefits in relation to lowering cholesterol levels...lowering bad cholesterol levels, providing cholesterol and metabolic support, lowering the risk of metabolic syndrome, aiding in weight loss or weight management, or has any benefits in relation to...excessive abdominal fat.
'Unwarranted and unrealistic expectations' may also result from a newspaper report lauding it as a 'wonder pill'.
Labels:
emma little,
miracle cure,
sun
Monday, 27 August 2012
Mail and Sun websites publish fake lion pic
The image of Tropical Storm Isaac (that wasn't) was not the only occasion today when MailOnline published - without checks - a photo it found on Twitter, which it then deleted.
They also ran this photo in an article on the 'Essex lion':
The article claimed it had the:
and said:
The article began:
The Sun also ran the pic, under the headline: 'First photo of lion on loose in Essex':
Both use the phrase 'lion on the loose' as if that was fact.
But the image used was fake. According to Marcus Edwards from Channel 4 News, the same photoshopped pic did the rounds last year during the riots, when a big cat was said to have escaped from London Zoo. Like the 'Essex lion' story, that was also nonsense.
The most recent MailOnline article now says:
'Widely distributed on Twitter'. But MailOnline forgets to mention its own, rather prominent use of the 'first picture of the lion on the loose'.
They also ran this photo in an article on the 'Essex lion':
(apologies for the poor quality screenshot)
The article claimed it had the:
Image that sparked police hunt for big cat in Essex town
and said:
Photo passed around social networking site believed to be lion
The article began:
This is believed to be the first picture of the lion on the loose which has sparked a huge police hunt for the beast.
The image - which has been widely distributed on Twitter - is thought to show the beast behind a car in a residential area in Basildon, Essex.
The Sun also ran the pic, under the headline: 'First photo of lion on loose in Essex':
(apologies for the poor quality screenshot)
Both use the phrase 'lion on the loose' as if that was fact.
But the image used was fake. According to Marcus Edwards from Channel 4 News, the same photoshopped pic did the rounds last year during the riots, when a big cat was said to have escaped from London Zoo. Like the 'Essex lion' story, that was also nonsense.
The most recent MailOnline article now says:
It has emerged that an image believed to show the lion which was widely viewed online was in fact a fake.
Essex police warned that 'several doctored photographs are in circulation through social networking sites and other media forums'.
And officers said one night-time picture in circulation showing the silhouette of what looked like a lion, was 'never one that police were examining'.
The image - which was widely distributed on Twitter - was thought to show the beast behind a car in a residential area in Basildon, Essex.
'Widely distributed on Twitter'. But MailOnline forgets to mention its own, rather prominent use of the 'first picture of the lion on the loose'.
Labels:
fake images,
mail,
sun,
what's wrong with this picture?
Wednesday, 25 July 2012
The People pays damages over drunken proposal 'exclusive'
On 6 November 2011, the People published this 'exclusive':
Church immediately issued a statement, pointing out the story was rubbish:
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:
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'.
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'.
Labels:
damages,
leveson inquiry,
libel,
lies,
mail,
sources,
sun,
the people
Thursday, 19 July 2012
Batman casting is a riddle to the Sun
The Dark Knight Rises opens on Friday.
Some Sun readers may be slightly confused, however, by seeing Anne Hathaway playing Catwoman.
Why? Because the Sun's Gordon Smart 'revealed' in January 2011 that Megan Fox had 'signed up to play Catwoman':
Moreover, in a 'world exclusive' in December 2008 (in which they also noted Rachel Weisz was 'up for' Catwoman), Smart and Jess Rogers also 'revealed':
The story says:
'Everyone' will have to wait...
Some Sun readers may be slightly confused, however, by seeing Anne Hathaway playing Catwoman.
Why? Because the Sun's Gordon Smart 'revealed' in January 2011 that Megan Fox had 'signed up to play Catwoman':
Moreover, in a 'world exclusive' in December 2008 (in which they also noted Rachel Weisz was 'up for' Catwoman), Smart and Jess Rogers also 'revealed':
The story says:
FUNNYMAN EDDIE MURPHY will play The Riddler in the next Batman movie, The Sun can reveal.
The Beverly Hills Cop star, 47, has been signed up by British director CHRISTOPHER NOLAN...
A film insider said...“Eddie’s a fantastic addition. Everyone’s excited to see what he does as the Riddler.”
'Everyone' will have to wait...
Labels:
'exclusive',
gordon smart,
jess rogers,
sources,
sun
Monday, 2 July 2012
Mail and Sun remove articles about 'riot' by football fans
Stephen Wren posted the following on FansOnline about articles that appeared in the Sun and Mail in February claiming there had been a riot after an abandoned football match:
The PCC confirms (Mail/Sun):
This suggests there will be no printed correction.
(Hat-tip to @quizeye)
After the Ipswich match was abandonded a couple of stories appeared in the press stating that Boro fans had 'gone on the riot' or 'rampage'. It said police were inspecting CCTV tapes in order to track down people involved.
I happened to be in the very close vicinity to the incident and recognised that the stories bore little resemblance to fact (indeed about the only fact that was correct was that the game was abandoned and the teams were Boro and Ipswich!).
I contacted Suffolk Police; Ipswich Town and the Boro offering my services as a witness to the event (and stating the actual facts). Ipswich and Suffolk police got back to me very quickly saying the story was basically a work of fiction.
I contacted the papers stating that their story was wrong in almost every element; giving the factual version of events and backing it up with the comments of Ipswich Town and the Police. They didn't reply.
I wrote again stating that they were in brech of the Press Complaints Commission Editors Code of Conduct (both in their article and in not correcting information that had been shown to be seriously inaccurate) and that I would make a formal complaint unless the stories were corrected.
Still no reply so I formally complained to the PCC who, initially, tried to suggest I couldn't complain as I was not the person 'wronged' and that any complaint must come from the club (who they advised had not complained about the articles).
I stated that, as a fan of MFC who was present at the game , I was being tarnished by the false story and therefore I was an injured party in the case. The PCC relented and agreed to take the complaint forward.
After some back and forth communication between myself, the papers and the PCC it was agreed that the stories were not accurate and both papers removed the stories from their websites and databases.
Additionally I recieved a personal apology from each paper.
The PCC confirms (Mail/Sun):
The complaint was resolved when the PCC negotiated the removal of the online article and a private letter of apology from the newspaper explaining the reasons for its failure to make direct contact with the complainant.
This suggests there will be no printed correction.
(Hat-tip to @quizeye)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)