Mr John McCormack and The Sunday Times

The Press Ombudsman has decided not to uphold a number of complaints made by the General Secretary of the Irish Clay Pigeon Shooting Association (ICPSA), Mr John Mc Cormack, that an article published in The Sunday Times on 15 July 2012 headlined “RTE gives job to ‘bottom pincher’” breached Principles 1 (Truth and Accuracy), 2 (Distinguishing Fact and Comment), 3 (Fairness and Honesty), 4 (Respect for Rights), 5 (Privacy) and 7 (Court Reporting) of the Code of Practice for Newspapers and Magazines.

Mr Mc Cormack complained that the headline to the article was neither true nor accurate because RTE did not give him a job, and the reference to “bottom pincher” in the headline failed to make it clear that this was something he was alleged to have done rather than a fact.

The newspaper said that the article had not breached the Code of Practice, and offered Mr Mc Cormack a right of reply through the publication of a letter to the editor. The complainant turned down this offer.

The newspaper pointed out that Mr Mc Cormack had himself agreed with a statement in the article, attributed to RTE, that he had been “hired as an analyst during the Beijing Olympics and was scheduled to do so again .....”. In relation to the description of the complainant as a “bottom pincher”, the article cited the complainant’s submission to an ICPSA Tribunal the previous March in which he admitted giving the woman a “gentle pinch” in an area described by him in a previous letter to the Board as “in the rear below her shooting vest.” He did not dispute the accuracy of either of these quotations. In these circumstances, the Press Ombudsman found that the description of the complainant in the headline, including the use of single quotations to indicate that it was an allegation, was, if inaccurate, not as significant an inaccuracy as would amount to a breach of Principle 1 of the Code.

Mr Mc Cormack complained that the use of his photograph in the article was dishonest and a breach of his privacy. However, subsequent to publication of the article under complaint the ICPSA invoiced the newspaper for the use of the photograph, quoting a set fee that it charged for the use of photographs when permission had not been sought or given, and when the photograph had not been credited to the ICPSA. The newspaper paid the fee. In these circumstances, a breach of the Code of Practice in relation to publication of the photograph does not arise.

Mr Mc Cormack complained about references to him in the article as “chief” and “head” of the Irish Clay Pigeon Shooting Association, because he was, he said, an ordinary member and an administrative employee of the Association. Given that he was the General Secretary of the organization, the references to the complainant in the colloquial manner reported did not amount to an error of sufficient significance to amount to a breach of the Code.

Mr Mc Cormack complained about the reporter’s attempts to speak to him by telephone and email and in particular, to the fact that a message was left on his voicemail system which, he said, had been deactivated since 2010. While Mr Mc Cormack said, subsequent to publication of the article, that he was precluded under Just Sport Ireland confidentiality stipulations from engaging with the reporter, it was not clear that the reporter was made aware of this confidentiality clause, or of the deactivation of the complainant’s voicemail. In the circumstances, the reporter’s reasonable attempts to make contact with the complainant in advance of the publication of an article critical of his actions did not present a breach of the Code of Practice.

Finally, Mr Mc Cormack complained about the reporting of the proceedings of the ICPSA tribunal, and his appeal against its decision to Just Sport Ireland. However, in the opinion of the Press Ombudsman, the newspaper’s offer to publish a letter from the complainant setting out his side of the story, although rejected by him, was sufficient remedial action on its part to respond to the complainant’s belief that the proceedings were not sufficiently covered in the article.

5 November 2012