I can't link to it as I'm on my phone, but they've used a tragic story about a 13 year old girl's death to have another dig at teachers! It's despicable to the girl's poor parents that the paper has used this story in this way. I'm so angry I can't even construct a sentence properly.
I came into "news" to rant about exactly that , having decided AIBU was not the right place!! the ITV news have also just "linked" this tragedy to the fact the teachers were on strike. An absolutely tragic event, of course, but NOT the fault of the school or the striking teachers AT ALL
Aren't they just explaining why she was sitting on a park bench on a school day? I think they have placed the greatest responsibility with the council as they had allegedly received complaints about this particular tree.
quote from parents - "Our beloved daughter's death was a tragic incident, which occurred only 24 hours ago, and we do not want it to be connected to any other events. We politely ask that our privacy be respected at this time and we will not be issuing anything further."
It was an accident. That branch fell at that time and she was there. had she not been there, maybe a mum and toddler would have been, or a couple of old ladies, or maybe no-one.
If ANYONE can be to blame for this, then its the body responsible for the upkeep of the park - council? But i think it highly unlikely that anyone would face legal action.
Headline Girl, 13, crushed to death by a falling branch as she sat on park bench on the day her teachers went out on strike
Please explain how you believe the Code of Practice has been breached. 1. accuracy - It is manifestly untrue that the teachers strike had anything to do with the accident described, as claimed by this newspaper article. The publisher has not taken due care to ensure it does not publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information. Once recognised, the significant inaccuracy, misleading statement and distortion was not corrected, promptly with due prominence, and with an apology. Instead, one instance of the inaccurate and misleading article (the headline) was changed while others remain, and no prominence has been given to this change, nor apology offered. While the title may have been amended later in the day, the story is still currently filed under 'teachers strike' and the distorted interpretation of events remains throughout the article.
5. intrusion into grief or shock - it is explicit within the PCC code of practice that in cases involving personal grief or shock, publication should be handled sensitively. It is hard to imagine how this article could be more in breach of this clause.
3. privacy - There is no justification for the intrusion into this grieving family's private life, and it is explicitly against their wishes and not with their consent that their story has been associated with other events, namely the teachers' strike. The invasion of privacy and lack of respect for this grieving family is breathtaking. The parents of the girl involved have said: "Our beloved daughters death was a tragic incident, which occurred only 24 hours ago, and we do not want it to be connected to any other events."
Which specific clause(s) of the Code are you complaining under? Clauses 1, 5, 3.