The PCC Chickens Out Over Jan Moir Article

So the Press Complaints Commission PCC have reached their verdict on Jan Moir's piece after Stephen Gately's death, the timing of which they said was "in questionable taste". They said:

"It would not be proportionate to rule against the columnist's right to offer freely expressed views about something that was the focus of public attention."

They had also passed it on to the Crown Prosecution Service who ruled that it was not unlawful:

"In December 2009, the Metropolitan Police passed the article and statements from two complainants to the Crown Prosecution Service to determine whether or not any crime had been committed through publication of that article.

"Having considered that material I have decided that there is insufficient evidence that any offence has been committed.

"In coming to this conclusion I have paid particular attention to Article 10 of the Human Rights Act which protects individuals' freedom of expression. It is an established legal principle that this freedom applies equally to information and ideas that are favourably received as to those which offend, shock and disturb.

"Though the complainants and many others found this article offensive, this does not make its publication unlawful."

So if I'm reading the CPS right the government legislation against incitement to racial or homophobic incitement is null and void next to Article 1o of the Human Rights Act. So too it would seem are the laws of liable, they were suppositions in Jan Moir's original article which she presented as fact.

On her saying that the singers death was not "natural" the PCC said that while this was controversial and speculative, "could not be established as accurate or otherwise". But surely the point was that on that particular Friday only days after the incident a newspaper columnist with no medical or forensic training or access to the corpse would be in a far less likely place to know what was accurate than family or medical professionals. She actually dismissed the comments of these to give her own slant on things, saying is was factual. The thing that could not have been established was what Jan Moir was saying on that point, so the PCC chickened out on the one point that was open to censure on accuracy grounds rather than opinion to incite hatred.

The PCC said that there was a fine line to be drawn "between critical innuendo which, though perhaps distasteful, was permissible in a free society – and discriminatory description of individuals, and the code was designed to constrain the latter rather than the former". The problem is as Sara Bedford pointed out yesterday this is not an isolated incident with the Daily Fail.

Almost every story that features a gay man leads to some sort of stereotyping and discriminatory description of lifestyle. There is always some slur in the way they put the story across. The latter is prevalent within that particular publication. The problem is that they spread it around and only individual stories can be raised at a time rather than the whole library of unfounded innuendo that they splurge out over and over and over again.

So while the PCC keep saying they cannot condemn one individuals freedom of speech the whole ethos of the paper is slanted in a particular way which does discriminate. Unfortunately the Code is also incapable of dealing with the largess of such views across an entire publication.

UPDATE: Reading the PPC's full findings I was particularly interested to see what it had to say about the cause of death SADS (Sudden Arrhythmia Death Syndrome) which Moir dismissed so fully as "not natural".

"It was clearly the columnist's opinion that "healthy and fit 33-year-old men do not just climb into their pyjamas and go to sleep on the sofa, never to wake up again". This was a general and rhetorical point, based on the view of the prevailing health of young men. It admittedly did not take into account the possibility of SADS or similar, but the Commission did not consider that it could be read to be an authoritative and exhaustive statement of medical fact. Equally, the Commission was fully aware of the widespread objection to the reference to Mr Gately's death as not being "natural". This was undoubtedly a highly provocative claim which was open to interpretation, and many people had considered this to be distasteful and inaccurate. It was a claim, nonetheless, that could not be established as accurate or otherwise. The article had set out the official cause of death so it was clear that this was a broad opinion rather than a factual statement."

So Andrew Cowles complaining thus about Moir saying the family were distorting facts:

"Although a post mortem had been conducted and the results published - confirming that Mr Gately had died from natural causes through an acute pulmonary oedema, believed to have been brought on by a heart attack - the thrust of the article was that this was questionable ("something is terribly wrong with the way this incident has been shaped and spun"; "the sugar coating on this fatality is so saccharine-thick that it obscures whatever bitter truth lies beneath")."

Appears to have no protection under the law. Journalists Columnists are at will under freedom of speech under the Human Rights act to deny facts, accuse the family who want these facts out to be liars, or indeed trying to obscure something. This is twisted and the PCC really has failed horrifically to defend factual representation today. The claim that Moir quoted the cause of death, she did but then only to rebuke it as nonsense. How that can pass accuracy under the PCC code dumbfounds me.

Read Also Andrew takes a look at one of the other clauses in depth. While a rather fluffy elephant renames the PCC the Press Cover-Up Cronies.

Gately 'Connected' Party Complaint Made About Jan Moir

Remember way back in October when Jan Moir wrote her poisonous piece on the eve of Stephen Gately's funeral in the Daily Fail.

Many of us ordinary people, 25,000 to be almost exact, took to our keyboards and wrote to the Press Complaints Commission and even though they did make a special case about it on their website. They wrote back to us saying there was nothing they could do under the code as none of us were 'directly' affected by the words on Jan Moir's hard drive.

Well today that has changed. Andrew Cowles was directly affected by the words that Ms Moir wrote has launched a formal complaint. Mr Cowles was Gately's civil partner and was present in the appartment when the man he loved died. Stephen Abell of the PPC.

"We're now investigating this complaint which we are taking forward formally and we'll consider it together with the 25,000 complaints as soon as possible.

"We'll be writing to the newspaper with this latest complaint from Andrew Cowles."

Obviously at the time of the article Cowles and the Gately family had other things they needed to do in grieving for their loved one. But now after a time of mourning Cowles is looking at the allegations that Moir made about a gay lifestyle in general but his and Stephen's in particular and seeking to set the record straight.

More people complained about that Jan Moir's than any single article in history and her unpology a week later did nothing to correct her mistake. Now the PCC are looking at how this has affected Andrew Cowles along with the other 25,000 of us who complained.

Even the PCC are Making Jan Moir a Special Case

Of course Jan Moir's article would have to be published on a day I was exceedingly busy then out having a good time. Indeed by the time I got home this evening the article appears to have been pulled from the Daily Fail website and the Press Complaints Commission (PPC) actually on their page about making a complaint saying, 'if you want to make a complaint about Jan Moir's article click here'. Apparently their website was down earlier so this may be to avoid too much overload on one server.

If you really want to read the full contents Cardiff Blogger has the full sorry piece with his commentary here.

I read it and logged a complaint with the PCC under three of their clauses. Accuracy, Intrusion into grief or shock and Discrimination. As the last of this has been widely covered elsewhere in the blogosphere I'm going to blog about the later.

Jan Moir writes:

"The sugar coating on this fatality is so saccharine-thick that it obscures whatever bitter truth lies beneath. Healthy and fit 33-year-old men do not just climb into their pyjamas and go to sleep on the sofa, never to wake up again."

Well I'm sorry they do. At only a few years older I thought I may have been facing something like that. My case was even more bizarre, I'd just left the gym, I may not have been in the peak of fitness but I still was pretty fit, but I experienced my first diagnosed cardiac episode, although I may have been having them for 20 years before. So yes I may very well have been one such person, so I question you accuracy.

When I was 16, one of our school friends did go to sleep and never wake up the day before our second Maths O'Level paper. So the whole school knew and the was there together to hear the news. The whole year was in shock at after the first hour when people could leave the hall, over half of my year did. Those of us who stayed couldn't settle for a good five minutes. At my 10 year reunion we marked the passing of 5 of our year, that is out of 200 or so pupils, as well as the one above 3 others were of natural causes. We had only just started to turn 28 never mind 33. Jan Moir must really have led a charmed life if she has never encountered someone young who has just passed away in their sleep.

As for her total disregard of the official cause of death, well as others have covered that heavily as well what more need I say. Her insinuations that there is something dark and sinister behind everything would mean many gay men should never again offer a bed or sofa for the night to a friend who has missed their last train, or can't be bothered waiting for the long queue at the taxi rank*. But then it appears that Ms Moir doesn't think that a member of Boyzone could be overflowing with the milk of human kindness, let alone the rest of the gay community.

The intrusion into grief and shock is maybe the hardest of the three clauses to apply. In the code it states:

5 Intrusion into grief or shock

i) In cases involving personal grief and shock, enquiries and approaches must be made with sympathy and discretion and publication handled sensitively. This should not restrict the right to report legal proceedings.

*ii) When reporting suicide, care should be taken to avoid excessive detail about the method used.

Now of course, Ms Moir seems to correlate the tragic death of Stephen Gately with the death of Kevin McGee the former partner of Matt Lucas. So maybe she does think it was a suicide despite all evidence to the contrary. So she does manage to avoid using excessive detail about the method used, firstly as there wasn't any, but more to the point she just makes it up.

The more solid ground of course it point about publication being handled sensitively. There is no way on this earth that this piece in the Daily Fail this morning cold possibly have been considered sensitive. To also publish on the eve of the funeral on the day that the body is returned to Ireland merely heightens the crassness of the piece as well as the timing.

Stuart Sharpe told me there was no point me blogging about this as I was heading out. Then when I got back that there was nothing new under the sun to add. I'm not sure if I have gotten a new take on this ridiculous woman's poisoned pen piece, but it certainly is mine and avoided too much of the obvious.

* You have been warned if you see the two of us out over the next few weekends lads. No can do, Ms Moir might get the wrong idea, the canasta game is just not going to happen.

Openly Homophobic Paper Fails Again

Shame on you Ephraim Hardcastle in the Daily Fail for this:

"Overtly gay Tory blogger Iain Dale has reached the final stage of parliamentary selection for Bracknell, telling PinkNews: 'I hope any PinkNews readers who live in Bracknell will come to the open primary on October 17 to select their new candidate.

"You don't even have to be a Conservative to attend.'

"Isn't it charming how homosexuals rally like-minded chaps to their cause?"

For starters what has the man's sexuality got to do with anything, especially his ability to apply for or do a job. In fact isn't discrimination on the grounds of human sexuality against the law of the land Daily Fail?

Secondly Pink News tends to interview high profile gay men and women with a story to tell. It gives their readers hope against the over accusing homophobic or just not recognised reality of the MSM like the Fail itself. So obviously when a high profile political event does feature a gay candidate he'll be asked for comment. Iain's full quote to the paper is:

"I'm delighted to be on the Bracknell shortlist. It's the only seat I have applied for and I hope any PinkNews.co.uk readers who live in Bracknell will come to the open primary on October 17th to select their new candidate. You don't even have to be a Conservative to attend."

We all know that Iain is a great fan of open primaries, even if I'm not so sure, he sees it as a way of letting the people have their say. He hasn't said vote for me, but has said turn up if you live in the seat and select your candidate. Hardly a case of rally like minded people to his cause, but asking people who are sometime ostracised by society and indeed have been by the Tory party to get involved in the electoral process.

Update: Iain himself has written about the story, starting with the line 'Just by writing this blogpost, I will probably damage my chances in Bracknell'. It is reported in Pink News and by others including Mark and Andrew. Even Lib Dem Voice got in on the act with a special story of the day round up called Homophobia is Gay when it's against Tories, too. Mark Pack also noticed the mystery of the missing comments on the piece on the papers site.

At the end of the day though Iain has recieved an apology from Peter MacKay of the Daily Mail, which Iain has accepted. But he also writes:

"I think there are two lessons here. Don't take this sort of thing lying down. Fight back and you can get a result. It wouldn't have been possible without the internet, though, would it?

"It is all very well for me to do this. I am in a position to. But what about if it had happened to someone else without the facilities to do what I did today? Think on that."

Update 2 00:40 Looks like we may have been taken for a ride. Iain Dale has just tweeted:

"Yup, judging from the content of the Ephraim Hardcastle today, the apology wasn't in fact from the real Peter McKay at all. PCC here I come."

Livingston FC: What the Papers are Saying

I was flicking through the sport's pages this morning to see what the papers say about the imminent liquidation of Livingston.

The Grauniad fail when they say:

'Presumably the number of people reading this column who care, or even know about, the probable demise of Livingston FC can be counted on the fingers of an oven glove.'

Personally I find such presumptions about Scots first and Livingston fans secondly a disgrace. An oven glove has one finger. Other than myself I can think of several other readers of that paper in the support. I may have to confine them to the level of the unmentionable red top.

The Daily Telegraph mention that this is the fourth Scottish Team to go out of business in 7 years, Livingston, Gretna, Clydebank and Airdrieonians. Though on a minor technicality Clydebank's position basically survived when the outfit moved to Airdrie.

The Scotsman has been matter of factly updating its story since early yesterday morning and says the fate lies in the SFL meeting this morning. But as the Daily Mail reports that would require a change in the SFLs rules over insolvency. Basically as Massone's company still technically owns the club as registered with the SFL which he is not prepared to give up voluntarily they may severe those links and offer Neil Rankine and Gordon McDougall, waiting in the wings with a joint rescue bid, the rights to the identity.

The small hope is rule 76 which says:

"Any club who goes in for an insolvency procedure are in breach of SFL rules. The committee then have full power to deal with it as it thinks fit."

The Herald reports that though the deadline for Massone to hand over his shares to McGruther acting for the Administrators to hand over his shares yesterday, is willing to wait until he walks into the meeting at Hampden this afternoon at 2pm for a change of heart. But he will need the shares in his hand and the interested parties by his side or else all looks doomed.

The unmentionable paper do publish a plea from Chris Innes* the team captain to the SFL to give a stay of execution. He of course went through this all last summer with Gretna.

All in all not a pleasant mornings reading, with only the thinnest glimmer of hope. Angelo you have seen only a small part of how upset the community is as many of us had to be at work yesterday. You appear to be the only person left who thinks you are able to save this club by holding unto your shares. Wake up! Smell the espresso and do the right thing.

*Hey after yesterday's horrible headline they gave a decent story today. But I still remember Hillsborough.