APPENDIX 114
Memorandum submitted by Councillor Jackie
Hawthorn, Birmingham City Council
Last year, a local newspaper published two articles,
on consecutive days and with photographs. The matter concerned
a Muslim lady, with limited knowledge of written English who had
been accused of aggravated racial harrassment by a neighbouring
family. As a councillor, I was already aware of the case, and
knew that the truth of the matter, was that the Muslim lady and
her young sons were being racially harrassed and threatened by
the neighbouring family, and there were witnesses to substantiate
this. Nevertheless, accusations were made and the case was taken
to Court, where it was formally dismissed.
The local newspaper, however, reported that
the Muslim lady had pleaded guilty, (which was simply not true)
took photographs of the lady, against her will, as she left the
Court building, and blew the whole matter out of proportion, even
interviewing the accusing family, in their home, after the Court
case, and publishing further malicious comments and lies.
Such was the reporting, that certain Officers
of the Housing Department, having seen the very prominent articles,
were even considering eviction of the innocent party. (The Court
hearing took place on 11 September and I still suspect that this
had a lot to do with the reporter's attitude, although the editor,
of course, denied that this had any bearing on the way that the
matter was reported.)
As a councillor, I could, of course, have tackled
the editor of the newspaper direct. I suspected, however, (rightly
or wrongly) that if I did so, a cover-up would be attempted, or,
at the very least, any apology would not be given the prominence
it deserved.
As I was so incensed at the distress caused,
by the newspaper, to the lady and her family, I also felt that
it might be better to deal with the matter through a third party.
I therefore contacted the Press Complaints Commission.
The response was extremely prompt, and the editor
of the newspaper, whilst attempting to justify how his reporter
had got the story completely wrong, offered an apology, although
as I had suspected would be the case, the apology was worded in
such a way as to shift a lot of the blame from the newspaper,
should any reader not be fully aware of the case.
I responded, through the Press Complaints Commission,
who were, once again, extremely prompt in dealing with the situation,
and this time, the editor agreed to publish the exact words that
I had requested by way of an apology, and also to publish a photo
of the wronged lady alongside the apology.
I feel that the Press Complaints Commission
do a very worthwhile and valuable job. I am well able to deal
with problems, but many people are not. Even so, in my own case,
I felt much happier in being able to "take the newspaper
to task" through an impartial third party and I am sure that
members of the public would also feel reassured at having their
complaints dealt with by such a competent body, and by knowing
that there was someone who they could turn to, should the need
arise.
As far as newspaper reporting is concerned,
one has only to look in the tabloids each week to see apologies
and retractions, following cases where not only the facts, but
even the names of people have been distorted or completely invented.
Many years ago, when I first became a (somewhat naive) councilor,
it used to upset me greatly when I was misquoted . . . . now I
simply avoid speaking to newspapers at all costs!! It is not much
safer to write letters to newspapers, as invariably sections are
edited out, putting a completely different meaning to what was
intended.
From my own experience, I think that the Press
Complaints Commission do a valuable and worthwhile job. More power
to their elbow!
20 January 2003
|
