# Is there an ombudsman for newspapers?



## Carramore (15 Mar 2009)

Can anyone tell me if there is an ombudsman for newspapers, to whom one can make a formal complaint when columnist on a newpaper expresses views that are demonstrably incorrect but the paper won't publish letters pointing out the error?


----------



## Smashbox (15 Mar 2009)

Your looking for the press ombudsman..

[broken link removed]


----------



## CCOVICH (15 Mar 2009)

There sure is

[broken link removed]

The following may be relevant in this case

*Principle 2 − Distinguishing Fact and Comment*

_2.1 Comment, conjecture, rumour and unconfirmed           reports shall not be reported as if they were fact, but newspapers and           periodicals are entitled to advocate strongly their own views on topics._
_2.2 Readers are entitled to expect that           the content of a publication reflects the best judgement of editors and           writers and has not been inappropriately influenced by undisclosed interests.           Where relevant, any significant financial interest of an organisation           should be disclosed. Writers should disclose significant potential conflicts           of interest to their editor._


(Taken from the Code of Practice for Newspapers and Periodicals)


----------



## Carramore (15 Mar 2009)

Thanks for the suggestion.  I went to the site to check the position.  It’s not that clear-cut.  The piece in question was labeled “Opinion” and while the relevant section of the Code of Practice states that “in reporting news and information, newspapers shall strive at all times for truth and accuracy”, it goes on to say that “newspapers and periodicals are entitled to advocate strongly their own views on topics” and “Readers are entitled to expect that the content of a publication reflects the best judgement of editors and writers”.  Presumably this is independent of whether those views are right or wrong.  

I accept that the author of an “Opinion” piece has the right to express a particular point of view, irrespective of whether that view is right or wrong, but if a significant number of readers write in to show how that point of view was incorrect, then it would seem unfair not to publish a selection of those letters.  Under the Code of Practice, however, it would seem that there is no such obligation on newspapers as the requirement for fairness only applies to “in the procurement of news and information”.


----------



## Carramore (15 Mar 2009)

One example that comes to mind (there are others) is Fintan O'Toole's recent assertion in an Irish Times Opinion piece that no employee should be allowed to take home more than €75,000 net of tax.  That is demonstrably stupid, if you take a real world situation where someone is paid commission equal to a percentage of their sales.  The alternatives are (1) for the employee to stop working when they reach the magic number, (2) to pay 100% marginal tax after 75k net, (3) for the employer to limit the employee's commission and so reap windfall profits or finally, (4) for the customers (who have bought the product in a competitive market) to be charged less.  All the above options are equally and demonstrably stupid.  

I'm sure that numerous letter writers have pointed this out to the Irish Times, yet not even a single letter critical of Fintan O'Toole's "opinion" has been published.  I know that I for one pointed this out.  My letter wasnt' published.  In general, readers of the Irish Times are an intelligent lot and I am pretty sure that there were many others who also wrote to point this out, but the Irish Times chose not to publish any of those letters.


----------



## rmelly (15 Mar 2009)

It's an opinion - everyone is entitled to them. If the readers are so intelligent, then they can form their own opinions. As such I doubt too many readers took his assertion to heart.

I disagree with much of what I read in the Opinion & Analysis and Editorials of the 'paper of record' - if you don't accept the slant they put on things, stop reading.


----------



## Carramore (15 Mar 2009)

I’m sorry if I’m not making myself sufficiently clear.  I emphasise that I have absolutely no problem with someone expressing their personal views in an “Opinion” piece, no matter how off the wall those views are.  What I do object to however is the censorship of letters pointing out how erroneous those opinions are.  From studying the Irish Times (albeit over a relatively short period), I am convinced that there is a deliberate policy of refusing to publish in the letters page the views of anyone who disagrees with the paper’s agenda.


----------



## rmelly (15 Mar 2009)

Even if there is such a policy, surely they are fully entitled to choose what appears in the newspaper? I think you're taking this too seriously. Yes they have an agenda, one that most readers are aware of and take into account when reading tripe like the item you referenced. I wouldn't have thought it deserved acknowledgment let alone rebuttal.

Why not start a blog or something to express your own uncensored opinion?


----------



## Carramore (15 Mar 2009)

You're right, I have been taking it too seriously.  This little exchange has helped me get it off my chest.  I'll calm down now. Thanks for acting as my unofficial psychotherapist.


----------



## Hillsalt (16 Mar 2009)

Carramore said:


> I am convinced that there is a deliberate policy of refusing to publish in the letters page the views of anyone who disagrees with the paper’s agenda.



In 1991, the then soccer journalist for the Irish Times reporter was NOT at the FAI Cup final at Lansdowne Road.  Instead, he was at an FAI junket in Scotland. The Irish Times did have some excellent photos from the game including a well timed photo of the only goal being scored but their 'top' football reporter wasn't even at the biggest game in the domestic game. He was hundreds of miles away, in a different country. 

SO, many years later, the aforementioned absent reporter referred to the said goal as _"...a goal headed in by Johnny Glynn..."_ eventhough it was kicked in.

One of my best mates was really peeved at this oversight. He wrote a well writtten letter to the Editor questioning how the journalist concluded that the winning goal was scored with a header when in fact it was scored from the right foot of the striker? He also wondered if the game was shown live on TV in Glasgow? 

The letter was never published.

Sorry for drifting off topic


----------



## extopia (16 Mar 2009)

I once wrote to the editor of the Times (via email, for what it's worth) to point out a very obvious piece of plagiarism by a very senior correspondent. My letter was never published or acknowledged in any way. But I was not in the least bit surprised.


----------



## Carramore (17 Mar 2009)

I'm in 100% agreement. Maybe we're naive, but I had expected better from the Irish Times, and from Fintan O'Toole, who I think is an excellent writer - when he sticks to areas with which he's familiar.  His areas of expertise definitely do not include finance and economics.


----------



## europhile (17 Mar 2009)

The Irish Times gets hundreds of letters every day; they can hardly publish everything they receive.  There are all sorts of crackpots out there sending in stuff.

Also, extopia.  Letters should be sent to the Letters Editor at lettersed@irishtimes.com.  If you sent an email to the editor, she may have thought it was a general complaint and that you did not intend it to be published.


----------



## Hillsalt (17 Mar 2009)

europhile said:


> The Irish Times gets hundreds of letters every day; they can hardly publish everything they receive.  There are all sorts of crackpots out there sending in stuff.



I find this hard to believe. 
Dozens of letters....maybe? 
Hundreds of letters every day? I don't believe it.


----------



## europhile (17 Mar 2009)

You'd be surprised.  There are loads of cranks out there who write interminable and frequent letters every time their particular hobbyhorse is mentioned.  They'd be better off writing to their local freesheet who are always looking for material to fill their pages with.


----------



## Carramore (20 Mar 2009)

I thought I'd buried this thread, but it lives on!  I don't have any direct experience but am inclined to agree with Europhile that they get hundreds of letters every day.  This reinforces my point.  The letters editor should try to reflect the range of views expressed in letters received, which is why I find it amazing that they didn't print a single letter disagreeing with Fintan O'Toole's ridiculous suggestion that there should be a cap of €75k on net pay.  The same is true of some of his other equally silly suggestions (from an economic/ financial perspective).


----------



## Complainer (21 Mar 2009)

Carramore said:


> I find it amazing that they didn't print a single letter disagreeing with Fintan O'Toole's ridiculous suggestion that there should be a cap of €75k on net pay.  The same is true of some of his other equally silly suggestions (from an economic/ financial perspective).


A quick search shows 42 letters over the past year which refer to Fintan, and a quick review of these show that many are taking issue with Fintan's views;

[broken link removed]


----------



## Carramore (22 Mar 2009)

Thanks for posting the link.  I went through the letters back to September 08 and they support 100% the point I've been making.  The only letters that were published disagreeing with Fintan O'Toole's views on economic or financial matters were from "Important People", such as Charlie McCreevy, etc. taking issue with (supposed) errors of fact about them or their organisations in articles penned by Fintan O'Toole.  Not a single letter from an ordinary punter disagreeing with his views on such matters was published.  Fine to disagree with him on hyphenated Obama or the activities of Hamas in Gaza but not about financial or economic issues.


----------



## Carramore (22 Mar 2009)

Sorry, I should have said apostrophe'd Obama.  It's too early on a Sunday morning for me!


----------



## Complainer (23 Mar 2009)

Carramore said:


> Thanks for posting the link.  I went through the letters back to September 08 and they support 100% the point I've been making.  The only letters that were published disagreeing with Fintan O'Toole's views on economic or financial matters were from "Important People", such as Charlie McCreevy, etc. taking issue with (supposed) errors of fact about them or their organisations in articles penned by Fintan O'Toole.  Not a single letter from an ordinary punter disagreeing with his views on such matters was published.  Fine to disagree with him on hyphenated Obama or the activities of Hamas in Gaza but not about financial or economic issues.



So is Peter Murray who queries Fintan's policy on pensions an 'important person' [broken link removed].

And is Nathanial Healy who queries Fintan's views on telecoms privatisiation an 'important person' [broken link removed].

And they are just the first page of the search result. We're in danger of getting into 'what did the Roman's ever do for us' territory here, I fear.


----------



## Carramore (24 Mar 2009)

Touche - partially.  I counted Peter Murray on the same side as FO'T, in claiming that Fintan missed worse problems with tax relief for private sector pensions.  I missed the letter on telecoms privatisation in my trawl.  OK, one letter of disagreement.


----------

