Complaint
A reader of this article complained that, in failing to distinguish between rules and various forms of guidance, it gave an inaccurate account of the Government鈥檚 Covid-related restrictions in place in England at the time of publication. 聽The ECU considered the complaint against the 大象传媒鈥檚 editorial standards of accuracy.
Outcome
Under the sub-headline 鈥淲hat are England鈥檚 new rules?鈥 the article said 鈥淧eople in England must stay at home and only go out for essential reasons鈥, and went on to list as a permitted exception 鈥淓xercise outdoors (limited to once a day)鈥.聽 Having considered the most recently published Government rules and a subsequent statement by the National Police Chiefs鈥 Council on similar instructions concerning travel for exercise, the ECU agreed with the complainant that the proposed limit on outdoor exercise to once a day was not at that time a rule, but constituted guidance.聽 An element of confusion here was understandable because new guidance on limiting exercise had not been incorporated into law but it appears that advice from the Government had not been altered or revised accordingly.聽 However, as the purpose of the article was to inform people about what was or was not permissible at the time, the element of inaccuracy was material to readers鈥 understanding of the situation, and this aspect of the complaint was upheld.聽 However, the ECU did not agree that other instances cited by the complainant were likely to mislead readers about what was permissible or fell below the standard of due accuracy in this context.
Partly upheld
Further action
The finding was reported to the Board of 大象传媒 News and discussed with the editorial team concerned.