Marlele Richards vs Hamilton Spectator
Robert Riley vs Toronto Sun
World Sikh Organization of Canada vs Ottawa Citizen

Marlene Richards vs Hamilton Spectator

The Ontario Press Council has upheld a complaint against the Hamilton Spectator involving two words in a headline that were not borne out by the content of a news story.

Published over an article about former Ontario chief justice Charles Dubin’s meeting to discuss terms of reference for his independent review of Toronto police practices insofar as they affect minority communities, the headline read, “Dubin the man to sort police racial war.”

“The article deals with Dubin’s qualifications to conduct an inquiry but the headline reads as though a race war is in progress,” Marlene Richards of Ancaster wrote in her letter of complaint. She described the headline as “irresponsible and inflammatory” and added that “a responsible newspaper should be aware of how rhetoric like this can cause real problems for officers on the street.”

The Spectator agreed that the headline was a failure in that the reference to a “police racial war” was not supported by the content of the article. It did not, however, agree with Richards’s suggestion that it should apologize to the Toronto Police Service.

The managing editor said the Spectator has appointed a headline editor whose job is to check headlines written by editors at the paper.

The article, picked up from the Toronto Star news service and published Oct. 26, 2002, was considered to be of particular interest in Hamilton because Dubin was born there. The Star had run a series of articles based on a statistical study of race and crime which focused on the treatment of blacks by Toronto police. The story said Dublin would not be looking at internal police data but would rely instead on consultation with minority groups and police to formulate recommendations for improving relations between the two.

TEXT OF THE ADJUDICATION (November 5, 2003)

Marlene Richards of Ancaster complained that a headline published in the Hamilton Spectator Oct. 26, 2002, was “irresponsible and inflammatory” in that it “demeaned the men and women of the Toronto Police Service.”

The headline, “Dubin the man to sort police racial war,” was run above a story about former Ontario chief justice Charles Dubin’s independent review of police practices and how they affect minority communities.

“The article deals with Dubin’s qualifications to conduct an inquiry but the headline reads as though a race war is in progress,” Richards wrote in her letter of complaint.

The Spectator conceded that it was not clear what the headline means. “It could mean any number of things and that’s a sure sign of a problem. Good headlines never leave a reader wondering or trying to guess meaning.”

Richards’s letter of complaint, dated two days after the article appeared, did not reach the Ontario Press Council until four months later; an earlier letter having been sent to an out-of-date address published in the Spectator. And a letter to the editor, dated Nov. 28, was not published.

In upholding the complaint, the Press Council says there is nothing in the story to justify the reference to “racial war” but it does appreciate the newspaper’s willingness to admit that the headline was a failure and it regrets that the issue could not have been dealt with in a letter to the editor.

Robert Riley vs Toronto Sun

The correction of a misleading headline in the Toronto Sun was imprecise but, in the opinion of the Ontario Press Council, the weakness wasn’t serious enough to justify upholding a reader’s complaint.

Robert Riley of Peterborough described as “grossly misleading and inflammatory” the headline GAY HIV SHOCKER – 27% HAVE IT BUT DON’T KNOW IT, which ran over a Canadian Press story published June 17.

The CP story accurately reported the details of a survey that said “an estimated one-quarter of homosexual and bisexual men in Ontario who have the AIDS virus may not know they are infected.” The survey provided a snapshot of sexual behaviours in the gay community.

The Sun on June 29 published a correction, which said the headline “may have been interpreted in a fashion not intended by Canadian Press.”

“In fact,” it added, “the survey of 5,000 gay and bisexual men found 27% of respondents who reported being HIV-negative were actually found to be carrying the AIDS virus.”

Noting that the correction was published eight days after Riley’s complaint was

e-mailed, the Sun said its editor-in-chief was being transferred to the Ottawa Sun at the time and the complaint fell through the cracks.

Riley wrote that the headline may have misled casual readers and even many attentive readers. “In a society where many groups face discrimination, harassment and abuse, including gay men and people with HIV, it is not difficult to foresee the attitudes and potential hysteria created by such a misleading and grossly incompetent and unfair headline.”

TEXT OF THE ADJUDICATION (November 5, 2004)

Robert Riley of Peterborough complained that a headline published in the Toronto Sun June 17 was “grossly misleading and inflammatory” and a correction did not properly clarify the error.

The headline, GAY HIV SHOCKER – 27% HAVE IT BUT DON’T KNOW IT, ran over a Canadian Press story that said “An estimated one-quarter of homosexual and bisexual men in Ontario who have the AIDS virus may not know they are infected, a survey that provides a snapshot of sexual behaviours in the gay community suggests.”

The Sun on June 29 published a correction which said the headline “may have been interpreted in a fashion not intended by Canadian Press” and added that “In fact, the survey of 5,000 gay and bisexual men found 27% of respondents who reported being HIV-negative were actually found to be carrying the AIDS virus.”

The Ontario Press Council says the wording of the correction may leave the erroneous impression that the CP article was at fault. It also notes that the correction was not published until eight days after the error was drawn to its attention--a delay that occurred at a time when the Sun’s editor-in-chief was being transferred.

But it recognizes that the Sun tried to correct the impression left by the flawed headline, also that anyone reading the complete article would not be misled.

And, in the Council’s opinion, the weaknesses were not serious enough to justify upholding the complaint.

World Sikh Organization of Canada vs Ottawa Citizen

A complaint that a headline on a story published in the Ottawa Citizen promoted “bias and discrimination” against Sikhs was dismissed with one reservation.

“Sikh terrorist deported” was the headline on a Jan. 23 article from Toronto reporting that Iqbal Singh had become the first person ordered deported since 1998 under Canada’s anti-terrorism law. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service was quoted as saying Mr. Singh had been active in the Babbar Khalsa’s violent campaign to establish a Sikh homeland in India. He was deported to Belize.

The World Sikh Organization of Canada complained that the headline “communicates an impression of intention on the part of an entire people simply because of one individual who may or may not have committed an isolated act of violence.”

“Since there has been no evidence provided relating to the conviction of Iqbal Singh or any particular Sikh group for any crime in India or Canada, we believe that this headline promotes bias and discrimination.”

The organization also questioned reliance on CSIS information, saying the intelligence body “has historically been considered an unreliable source of factual information.”

Noting that Mr. Singh, who arrived in Canada in 1991, had denied having engaged in violence or being a member of extremist groups, the organization said:

“It is unfortunate that in the example set before us today, CSIS ‘experts’ are granted an assumed respectability that is never afforded the accused subject, the average Canadian, the Sikh community or its spokespersons.”

The Citizen said police had arrested Mr. Singh in 1998 and, after hearing the CSIS case against him, a Federal Court judge was sufficiently impressed by the evidence to order his deportation as a “risk to national security.”

Seeking to justify the inclusion of “Sikh” in the headline, the newspaper said Mr. Singh was deported because of his connection to a terrorist group working for a Sikh homeland and “his religion is fundamental to his motives for involvement in this cause.”

“The Citizen is painfully aware that linking religion or ethnicity to extremist acts or organizations may have unintended effects on other members of those religious or ethnic groups. But we believe that readers sometimes need to know this information to fully understand the forces driving so many conflicts around the world.”

TEXT OF THE ADJUDICATION (July 11, 2000)

The World Sikh Organization of Canada complained that a story published in the Ottawa Citizen Jan. 23 inappropriately referred to a person’s religious affiliation in a headline that said “Sikh terrorist deported.” The article related that Iqbal Singh had become the first person deported under Canada’s anti-terrorism law.

The Ontario Press Council is on record as declaring that a person’s religion should be included in news stories and headlines only when clearly relevant. In this case, it does not believe The Citizen should be faulted for the reference to Mr. Singh as a Sikh since he was closely involved with the sometimes violent campaign for creation of an independent Sikh homeland in the Punjab.

The Council believes the headline is flawed because it assumes that Mr. Singh is a terrorist although he has not been convicted of terrorism, only that a federal court judge accepted evidence he is a associated with what the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service has described as a terrorist organization. It would have preferred a headline along the lines of “Suspected terrorist deported,” but with this reservation it dismisses the complaint.

TOP OF PAGE