maandag, september 28, 2015

While the APC accepted that some of the comments expressed in the editorial may have been the result of poor expression, the effect was to trivialise the crime and crimes of that kind.
It was the APC’s conclusion that expressions used with reference  to child sexual assault, in particular terms such as “merely touching” and “misguided curiosity” reflect a significant misunderstanding of the nature and effects of this type of offending and of its seriousness.
APCThe Council noted the paper did publish a number of responses to the editorial piece, while a follow-up editorial expresses regret – but did not apologise. A subsequent piece published in May contained a general but qualified apology that began with a claim that the publication’s critics were like a “lynch mob”.
It was the APC’s view that the editorial would have caused substantial offence to a large number of victims, their families and to members of the wider community.
The council ruled the measures taken by the Hamilton Spectator did not remove the effects of the breach “nor does the rather grudging apology prevent the matter being treated as a significant breach”.

Geen opmerkingen: