And here's an extract from the PCC ruling:
Not the greatest of victories though. I first blogged about this when the BBC ran the bogus allegation of antisemitism at the SOAS meeting. Here's the BBC's response to the PCC ruling:
And here's the Jewish Chronicle's response to the same thing:
ECU Ruling: Jewish man jeered at SOAS university debate, News Online, 17 December 2009Publication date: 7 May 2010ComplaintThe item reported a claim that a Jewish contributor from the floor had been the subject of anti-Semitic abuse. News Online quickly acknowledged that this claim was contradicted by others present, and replaced the original report with a more accurate account of the situation within 24 hours. However, two people involved in the organisation of the debate complained that this action was insufficient.OutcomeAlthough the action taken by News Online would be sufficient to resolve a complaint in most circumstances, in this instance the original report had been reflected in other online items and in the press. In addition to replacing it with a more accurate account of the situation, it should have been made clear to visitors to the page that the original account had been misleading. UpheldFurther actionA note has been added to the revised article to make clear that the original version had been at fault in reporting the claim of anti-Semitic abuse uncritically. News Online staff have been reminded of the importance of adhering to the guidelines on handling corrections to online material.
The facts of this story are in dispute. Since it was published, the organisers of the meeting have been in touch to tell us that they absolutely deny that there was any “racist jeering”. In their view, the words reported were misheard. They say what was actually said was: “Do you really want to know?”, in response to Mr Hoffman’s question, “Why don’t you let me speak?”. They say that Mr Hoffman was unwelcome because of his views, not because of his Jewish name.The BBC's response was to correct a report based on lies. The JC's was simply to repeat the lies. Still, at least they've been exposed.