Apology - The Grauniad

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Whiskybreath, May 28, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Damages and legal costs are the least they should pay.

    The apology should run for a month minimum
  2. The Grauniad is still being criticized over this one: they ran the apology in the clarifications column (i.e. a tiny little sidebar). PCC guidelines say that the apology should be as prominent as the original article.

    This newspaper is trying to position itself as a more grown-up, centrist rival to The Times instead of being the house organ of Dave Spart, failed public sector malcontents and teachers (The Indy is doing that too well, you see). Fat chance whilst they continue knee-jerk lying about anyone who doesn't fit the nut-eating agenda of their editorial policy.

    Interesting that Col. Tim chose to give them so much of his time. My enemy's enemy is my friend?

  3. Not only should some serious damages and total legal costs be paid, but the apology should be on the same page, with the same print size cover the same amount of space and run fot the same length of time as the originall artical where they did all the slandering

    If the original article made the headlines and front page for a week then so should the apology and retraction of the lies they printed to sell a few extra papers.
  4. also a "coincidence" that both officers have been subjected to trial by media as a result of allegations by officers from our closest ally?

    Post Script: For once, I note with some satisfaction that M'learned friend continues to earn a crust from this example of the lofty standards of British Journalism:
    Carter Ruck

    If the BMA can strike members off, surely it would be in the public interest for the NUJ to adopt a similar policy?
  5. Did you read that in The Grauniad ?
  6. It's right that The Grauniad should do a public climb down. The allegations aren't as serious, but a word to the wise - don't end up like the Daily Telegraph, who were, in the words of the judge, 'obliged to compensate Mr Galloway...and to make an award for the purposes of restoring his reputation' - to the tune of £150,000
  7. I agree with this to an extent, but myself feel that the Guardian is a mouth piece for a good part of the remaining left wing nutters and growing number bleeding heart liberals we've got in this country today. It uses inflammatory language and invenctive on a par with the Morning Star and An Phoblacht. Ever read any of Polly Toynbee's stuff? Balanced journalism it ain't.

    As for the damages paid to both UK officers in this case, it's not enough. Both have been compromised and possibly careers damaged. But then, when was any section of the Press the soldier's true friend.
  8. I was about to say The Torygraph. Then again (apart from the peerless John Keegan) that organ generally promulgates the blimpish agenda of The Establishment and is as damaging, in it's own curious way, as the leftist nonsense of The Grauniad.

    Although I agree with the sentiment, if I read another rant by Hitler Hastings about "how great we are because we wear berets and the Spams are just clueless barbarians" or an editorial about how fatty Soames would make a great Defence Minister on the back of ten minutes in a cav regiment I think I'll actually puke.