[Big Arnold]

Following an article in last Monday’s paper which said that a pro-cannabis protest in Hyde Park had been poorly attended because of the rain, the organisers have asked us to clarify that the event was nevertheless attended by several thousand people.

An article on Thursday about Russian warplanes in Nato airspace incorrectly described the subsonic Tu95 Bear bomber as supersonic.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article ... z30V3d5800" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Carlos The Badger]

Fuck right off, Papa Doc. You're just taking the piss now.

[Big Arnold]

5 Daily Mail Corrections You Simply Won’t Believe!

http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2013/11/08/5-d ... t-believe/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[satnav]

Our article of 11 December “British couple charged with human trafficking and keeping their au pair as a ‘slave’ in France” incorrectly stated that Robert and Sharon Moses had been ‘charged with human trafficking’. We are happy to make clear that the couple did not face any criminal charges. The hearing was part of a civil case brought by the au pair seeking damages and compensation for inadequate payment; the claim was later rejected. We apologise to Mr and Mrs Moses for the error.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article ... z339NK6F4F" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Shame it took the paper nearly 6 months to apologise.

[Big Arnold]

This one took 8 months. A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes,

Clarifications and corrections
PUBLISHED: 01:21, 3 September 2014 | UPDATED: 01:23, 3 September 2014

An article on December 31 about Romanian immigration quoted politician Ion Prioteasa saying that passengers from his region would double this year.
Mr Prioteasa has made clear that he was referring to all destinations, not just the UK.
While Wizz Air accepts that it has introduced more flights during 2014, it
denies that they had doubled in number at the time of the article.
We are happy to clarify that a Romanian quoted asking about child benefits on a website was already working here.

Happy in the spitting rivets sense.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article ... z3CL81lr9c" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Big Arnold]

Clarifications and corrections
By DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 00:43, 16 September 2014 | UPDATED: 00:43, 16 September 2014

At the Daily Mail we take great pride in the quality of our journalism.
All our journalists are required to observe the Editors’ Code of Practice and the Mail is a member of the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), the new regulatory body for the Press set up in response to the Leveson Inquiry.
We aim to correct any errors as promptly as possible.
An item about a party held by Tory MP George Hollingbery on September 11 quoted neighbour Julie Hindmarch as saying, ‘The music wasn’t something you would expect a middle-aged Tory MP to listen to.' Ms Hindmarch would like us to clarify that this was not her own view but a comment made on a local social media site.
If you wish to report an inaccuracy, please email corrections@dailymail.co.uk.
To make a formal complaint under IPSO rules please go to http://www.dailymail.co.uk/readerseditor" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; where you will find an easy-to-use complaints form.
You can also write to Readers’ Editor, Daily Mail, Northcliffe House, 2 Derry Street, London W8 5TT.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article ... z3DbQuhvRx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Big Arnold]

An article in You magazine on June 29, about the divorce of Scot and Michelle Young, referred to lawyer Stephen Jones as Mr Young’s aide. We would like to clarify that Mr Jones and his company, Jirehouse, are not Mr Young’s lawyers but rather they act for Mr Young’s creditors. We are also happy to confirm that the court found no impropriety on Mr Jones’s part in relation to this matter.

Event’s serialisation of Roger Moore’s memoirs on August 24 told how nightclub owner Johnny Gold visited Peter Sellers in the South of France and gave him an envelope that contained drugs. We would like to make clear that the envelope was a gift from a friend in London and Mr Gold was unaware of its contents.

Last week we reported there are more than 1,000 sexual assaults each year involving taxi drivers in London. We are happy to point out that this police figure relates solely to unlicensed cab drivers.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article ... z3DbRyNpGz" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Safe_Timber_Man]

This is actually on the main page.....granted, it's right at the very bottom, but hasn't been hidden away in the corrections and clarifications section!

An article in the Daily Mail that said a doctor condemned a bus driver to a year of hell was defamatory, a judge has ruled.
The story said Spanish-born Antonio Serrano judged Kevin Jones unfit to drive – because of excess alcohol consumption – without carrying out proper tests.
It said he wrote to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, which ‘astonishingly’ revoked Mr Jones’s bus, car and motorcycle licences.
Former columnist Kelvin MacKenzie said in the 2012 article it was a shocking case in which Mr Jones regained his right to drive only with the help of an MP and when tests by another doctor showed he did not depend on alcohol.
Mr Justice Dingemans said in his High Court judgment that he accepted Dr Serrano’s evidence about a consultation at his surgery at St Leonards-on-Sea in East Sussex during which the GP concluded Mr Jones was drinking so much he could not drive a vehicle safely.
Dr Serrano said that, when asked how much he drank, Mr Jones had said ‘er, too much’, had mumbled something about being ‘a bit of an alcoholic’, adding after a pause: ‘I drink half a bottle of Bacardi a night.’
Dr Serrano said the consultation lasted 29 minutes and he told Mr Jones so much alcohol would impair his driving the next morning. But Mr Jones told the court his remarks about drinking were meant as a joke.
Mr Jones said the doctor had misunderstood what he was saying and wrongly concluded that he was drinking heavily every night. Both Mr Jones and his wife Sam denied that he had said he was ‘a bit of an alcoholic’ during the consultation.
‘The main dispute is about what was said about Mr Jones’s drinking. On this I accept Dr Serrano’s evidence. There is no reason to think Dr Serrano, who had never met Mr and Mrs Jones before, would invent this statement and state that the matter needed to be reported to the DVLA, unless it had been said.’
The judge ordered Dr Serrano should be paid damages of £45,000 by Associated Newspapers, owners of the Daily Mail.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article ... -case.html

[SoulBoy]

2012 article? So they had to be dragged, kicking and screaming, through the courts before they made a reluctant retraction.

[Big Arnold]

Guess who was responsible?

Kelvin MacKenzie's Daily Mail column sparks £200,000 libel claim

The Daily Mail column reported that the patient's local MP, Amber Rudd, was "appalled" at his treatment by Serrano. In fact, the Tory MP made it clear she had no view or comment when contacted by Rae on Mackenzie's behalf, according to the claim form

.


http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/a ... daily-mail" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[torontoboy45]

Press Gazette reporting that Serrano has taken Dacre for £45k plus costs - so, the £200k figure is probably close. I so hope this had Dacre double-cunting in the office.

[Big Arnold]

That Guardian article was 18 months old,and refers to the original claim. I expect the Guardian will have something more up to date soon.

[Daley Mayle]

The Mail could truthfully headline this story to its readers as 'Mail loses another libel case and guess who will pay for it, YOU'.

[Safe_Timber_Man]

Any idea why it's on the main page, on this occasion? Is that something the wronged can request at the judge uphold?

[Fozzy]

I assume it must have been ordered by the court. I know that the placement of an apology is a regular issue when cases are settled, so presumably this was requested by the claimant. I suspect the Judge was pretty unimpressed by the Mail's conduct of the case.