UKIP: Paper apologises to Nigel Farage

kernow · 18-05-2008, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raymond Finch

Ha ha!

He can't win with you bitter buggers can he?

You were like vultures when it came out and now you just cannot admit you were wrong.

Well said Raymond!

eublues · 18-05-2008, 05:55 PM

I see that the apology is fairly prominent, being on page 2 in the 'In the News' section.

Anthony Butcher · 18-05-2008, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrabody

I await much wailing and knashing of teeth from some on this forum.

To be fair, I think that most people here accepted that the paper was wrong a long time ago. The only real issue of discussion was why it took so long for the paper to issue the correction.

I presume then that the talk of legal action by Farage has been dropped now?

Or does an admission like this provide him with a guaranteed win in court?

Bob FM · 18-05-2008, 07:33 PM

Paper apologises to Nigel Farage

Sunday, 18 May 2008

An apology to UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage MEP has been published by The Sunday Times following allegations made against Mr Farage by the paper in February.

The newspaper says:

"Our report 'Anti-Brussels MEP, Nigel Farage, pays son from EU funds', February 24, wrongly stated that Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party (UKIP), had used taxpayers' money to employ his son as his assistant. The report suggested, again wrongly, that as an opponent of the EU 'gravy train' Mr Farage was also a hypocrite. We accept that there was no foundation for these statements and apologise to Mr Farage for any distress or embarrassment caused."

Raymond Finch · 18-05-2008, 07:33 PM

The legal action would have been to make the paper print an apology in a prominent position.
This they have done.
What else needs to be done?

Bob FM · 18-05-2008, 07:37 PM

As I understand it, the advice was to let the issue rest, as Nigel had successfully countered the allegations. On April 28th on The Daily Politics Show the issue was raised again without warning. I saw Nigel that afternoon and he was understandably livid. It was this I am led to believe that has led for the demand for an apology. Whilst I am not privy to the legal issue I would suspect this will be the end of it except for another apology this time from the BBC. Methinks that may be a long time coming.

charlie endell · 18-05-2008, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Allen

I wonder if charlie endell will be posting on this subject.

What page is it on? I don't see it...

"...had used taxpayers' money to employ his son as his assistant".

Read my posts - that's not what he is accused of. Check the wording.

Anthony Butcher · 18-05-2008, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raymond Finch

The legal action would have been to make the paper print an apology in a prominent position.
This they have done.
What else needs to be done?

Oh I don't think that he needs to do any more at all (although they should really publish it on their website too). However, the fact that the libel was allowed to stay 'live' for so long and then was repeated on a major political programme might give him the opportunity to claim a serious amount of cash from them.

Alternatively, he could use it as a good will gesture not to sue them... although I think that perhaps relations with the paper may be beyond repair given the previous articles.

Aardvark · 18-05-2008, 08:31 PM

Just checked all my posts on the subject and will not be wringing my hands - I said early on on the original thread that NF must sue or get a correction to maintain credibility.

I must admit I still trust Foggo, who wrote the item with another journalist. I don't think he loses credibility, but his source does. I still think the source is someone who has posted on this forum in the past who has his/her axe to grind. He/she will not get so many things in print as before.

Journos rely heavily on their sources and have to be very careful. Presumably the source of the Tommy Farage allegation was a person who has proved reliable in the past, otherwise the story would have had to be 'stood up'. I don't think it will affect Foggo's standing at the ST as he would have to screw up big time to lose his job; an apology to the leader of a minor party is neither here nor there. I see no mention of a cash pay out, so the ST bosses won't be too fazed.

Farage still employs/employed his wife after UKIP MEPs were urged not to and there is still some sort of investigation under way, that is not denied and is not part of the apology.

Bob FM · 19-05-2008, 06:44 AM

Are all the new posts designed to push this off the front page.

18-05-2008, 07:33 PM	#14 (permalink)
Bob FM Uber Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: South Marston Swindon Posts: 2,148	The Text Paper apologises to Nigel Farage Sunday, 18 May 2008 An apology to UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage MEP has been published by The Sunday Times following allegations made against Mr Farage by the paper in February. The newspaper says: "Our report 'Anti-Brussels MEP, Nigel Farage, pays son from EU funds', February 24, wrongly stated that Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party (UKIP), had used taxpayers' money to employ his son as his assistant. The report suggested, again wrongly, that as an opponent of the EU 'gravy train' Mr Farage was also a hypocrite. We accept that there was no foundation for these statements and apologise to Mr Farage for any distress or embarrassment caused."

18-05-2008, 07:37 PM	#16 (permalink)
Bob FM Uber Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: South Marston Swindon Posts: 2,148	Legal Action As I understand it, the advice was to let the issue rest, as Nigel had successfully countered the allegations. On April 28th on The Daily Politics Show the issue was raised again without warning. I saw Nigel that afternoon and he was understandably livid. It was this I am led to believe that has led for the demand for an apology. Whilst I am not privy to the legal issue I would suspect this will be the end of it except for another apology this time from the BBC. Methinks that may be a long time coming.

18-05-2008, 08:31 PM	#19 (permalink)
Aardvark Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Oxonia Posts: 4,254	Just checked all my posts on the subject and will not be wringing my hands - I said early on on the original thread that NF must sue or get a correction to maintain credibility. I must admit I still trust Foggo, who wrote the item with another journalist. I don't think he loses credibility, but his source does. I still think the source is someone who has posted on this forum in the past who has his/her axe to grind. He/she will not get so many things in print as before. Journos rely heavily on their sources and have to be very careful. Presumably the source of the Tommy Farage allegation was a person who has proved reliable in the past, otherwise the story would have had to be 'stood up'. I don't think it will affect Foggo's standing at the ST as he would have to screw up big time to lose his job; an apology to the leader of a minor party is neither here nor there. I see no mention of a cash pay out, so the ST bosses won't be too fazed. Farage still employs/employed his wife after UKIP MEPs were urged not to and there is still some sort of investigation under way, that is not denied and is not part of the apology. __________________ When in Woking do as the Wokes do. "I do not wish to form my opinions by thoughtlessly quoting others; I wish others to support their opinions by sensibly quoting me." Paul Wesson (Aardvark) 13th April 2008

19-05-2008, 06:44 AM	#20 (permalink)
Bob FM Uber Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: South Marston Swindon Posts: 2,148	New Posts Are all the new posts designed to push this off the front page.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

18-05-2008, 05:55 PM	#12 (permalink)
eublues Uber Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 3,189	I see that the apology is fairly prominent, being on page 2 in the 'In the News' section.

18-05-2008, 07:33 PM	#15 (permalink)
Raymond Finch Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 515	The legal action would have been to make the paper print an apology in a prominent position. This they have done. What else needs to be done?