Tuesday, November 08, 2005
The Commission Speaks
I received a letter containing the decision of the Press Complaints Commission concerning Mr. C Galbraith v The Times.
The overall assessment was that no breach of the journalistic code had been made. A lot of the two-page detailed report seemed to indicate a certain amount of Teflon-coated decision making.
In the case of the breach of the Public Order Act of 1986, the Commission felt it could not comment, since this was not under their jurisdiction. And of Clause 12 (Discrimination) , the most significant charge I placed at the Times' feet, it said, "this clause is not applicable to groups". It would appear it is non-discriminative to refer to the Scots in demeaning terms because the article was not directed at me personally.
The Commission did send a copy of my complaint and their findings to the editor of The Times, a Mr Thomson Esq., so that he is made aware of my concerns and of the findings. I doubt I'll her anything satisfactory.
And so Ross Clark and The Times have got away with basically calling the Scottish a bunch of "murderous" morons who will never live up to the English, and if it were up to him he would rebuild Hadrian's wall to keep us out. Talk about keeping ancient rivalries alive and spouting non-founded prejudiced nonsense. I expected more of The Times and won't be reading their jumped-up tabloid again.
By evening I started to feel revived again though my chest it still a bit dodgy. I did some editorial work on TSDR. I've been reading some submissions and find it very hard to place the word 'rejection' on a piece. I know the turmoil of having a crafted story or poem rejected can cause, so doing it someone else does not come naturally in any shape or form.
Okay, I might be learning about the editorial side of producing a magazine, but it's not nice turning people down and I find myself looking for ways to improve what they have sent. But then, that removes the author's personality and makes it worthless.