It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Sun's UK Muslim 'jihadi sympathy' article 'misleading', Ipso rules

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 05:25 AM
link   


An article in the Sun that claimed nearly one in five UK Muslims had "sympathy for Jihadis" was misleading, the new press regulator has ruled.

The paper's story in November reported the results of a survey of UK Muslims, generating more than 3,000 complaints.
The Independent Press Standards Organisation ruled it breached the accuracy clause of its editors' code.

Ipso also upheld a complaint about the headline of an article in The Times which reported the Sun's survey with the headline "One in five British Muslims has sympathy for Isis".

The Sun's UK Muslim 'jihadi sympathy' article 'misleading', Ipso rules

Imagine a Murdoch owned Newspaper not being entirely truthful with people eh?

This is something of a lesson for those who wish to jump on every single thing they read and take it as face value in a world where information is controlled by very few sources who are putting out what THEY want you to hear.

The number of times I have seen the original article quoted as "gospel truth" by people on ATS and off it is astounding.

The problem is that the damage is now done. The idea is out there in the collective consciousness and people will still refer back to it - that or they will say that Ipso is being "politically correct" here, when actually what you have seen is propaganda in action, from a newspaper owned by one of the most dangerous men on the planet who attempts to use editorials to "shock steer" public opinion ih the direction that he wishes them to go.

And its not just this article, there have been many others over the years and - more recently - one entitled "Queen backs BREXIT" which had no substance whatsoever, and was attributed to "unnamed sources" who apparently witnessed an event that no one else can remember and has earned the ire of the palace who lodged an official complaint about it (the Queen famously remains neutral in such matters)

We live in dangerous times, where information is key. Always check, re-check and be wary of your sources.




posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 05:31 AM
link   
a reply to: neformore

Amen to that.

Truth does not sell newspapers.



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 05:36 AM
link   
a reply to: neformore

The media manipulating the truth and fabricating lies ?

NEVER!!!!

What I find more worrying is the article doesn't seem to state what punishment (if any) the Sun and Murdock "inc" will be getting, it's almost like they're just softly slapping on the wrists and saying you can't do this it's naughty



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 05:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Discotech
a reply to: neformore

The media manipulating the truth and fabricating lies ?

NEVER!!!!

What I find more worrying is the article doesn't seem to state what punishment (if any) the Sun and Murdock "inc" will be getting, it's almost like they're just softly slapping on the wrists and saying you can't do this it's naughty

The punishment will be to print a retraction. The problem with that is. The retraction will be 2-3 lines at most, hidden away in the bottom corner of a page somewhere inside the paper.

In fact, just to prove my point. If anyone here has access to the #un in the next few days. I dont mean buy that #wipe, lift one from your place of work or a friend when someone is finished with it. Look for the retraction, take a pic of said retraction and publish in this thread.

edit on 26-3-2016 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 05:49 AM
link   
As you say, the damage is done. It's also an indicator that stories like are a part of the Sun's overall message.

So why the editorial stance? What's the deal? Who benefits?

Is 21st Century Fox pushing for division? Are they hyping the conflict? Are they trying to sell media or are they directly influencing the political policies of nations? Both and more?

Retractions are notoriously forgettable and barely anyone will learn the lesson that our media habitually lies to us.



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 05:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

I guess I'm expecting too much decency from the so called watchdog to actually issue a fine for printing slander then right ?



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 05:58 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit


Truth does not sell newspapers.

The truth may not sell, but it does get around.

A thousand news segments from a hundred channels may weave a huge construct, only to be toppled by a single bullet of truth. Everyone goes uh huh and goes about their business.

Somewhere they are still spinning the lies, but most informed people have seen through it and pay no more heed.



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 05:58 AM
link   
I've always said any retractions should have to be printed in the same size typeface and using the same pages and sizes as the original article.

Once they have to print 'we lied' headlines covering the entire front page and most of the next few pages as their original lies - I think we would quickly see a decline in this sort of thing.

Of course if anybody in government cared about truth then this would have happened decades ago.



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 06:08 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

I would certainly hope that your assessment is accurate. If it is not however, then it bodes ill for the nation as a whole.

There is little as concerning as the habit the population has fallen into over years previous, to take on collectively held beliefs, based on little more than the contents of a newspaper.



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 06:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: TrueBrit


Truth does not sell newspapers.

The truth may not sell, but it does get around.

A thousand news segments from a hundred channels may weave a huge construct, only to be toppled by a single bullet of truth. Everyone goes uh huh and goes about their business.

Somewhere they are still spinning the lies, but most informed people have seen through it and pay no more heed.

One of the lessons I learned during my religious journey is that "A single truth can overturn 1,000 lies". Lies build on top of other lies and use old lies as justifications for false conclusions. So the whole house of cards collapses when the truth is finally revealed.

Just glad this should finally be put to rest. I vaguely remember a thread on ATS last year about the original article (or about a similar fake story).



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 06:28 AM
link   
The Sun newspaper is the newspaper of the common man and speaks "our" language.
Except that isn't true it just appears that way.
Worshipful Company of Stationers and Newspaper Makers
a reply to: neformore
The Sun newspaper is not national, it is a private company much like the bank of england and the government.



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 06:28 AM
link   
the sun is toilet paper. even by general sleazy tabloid standards, it's low.



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 06:35 AM
link   
Much like the government and the bank of england...a reply to: RoScoLaz4




posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 07:14 AM
link   
Doesn't matter that it's not true. It's out there now and will be endlessly regurgitated as fact by people that have an agenda to push.



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
One of the lessons I learned during my religious journey is that "A single truth can overturn 1,000 lies".


Although, where religion is concerned, a single lie can over-turn a 1,000 truths, such as with women's and girl's rights as a starter and the constraining of free-thought and action.

While The Sun has been rightly castigated for shoddy and misleading journalism, there remains worrying themes in Muslim polls in the UK, such as the support for Shariah law, the (mis) treatment of lesbian and gays, apostasy and the limiting of the freedom to satirise Islam and Muhammed.

An example

ComRes poll for the BBC early 2015 opens in a PDF



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 12:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: neformore


An article in the Sun that claimed nearly one in five UK Muslims had "sympathy for Jihadis" was misleading, the new press regulator has ruled.

The paper's story in November reported the results of a survey of UK Muslims, generating more than 3,000 complaints.
The Independent Press Standards Organisation ruled it breached the accuracy clause of its editors' code.

Ipso also upheld a complaint about the headline of an article in The Times which reported the Sun's survey with the headline "One in five British Muslims has sympathy for Isis".

The Sun's UK Muslim 'jihadi sympathy' article 'misleading', Ipso rules

Imagine a Murdoch owned Newspaper not being entirely truthful with people eh?

This is something of a lesson for those who wish to jump on every single thing they read and take it as face value in a world where information is controlled by very few sources who are putting out what THEY want you to hear.

The number of times I have seen the original article quoted as "gospel truth" by people on ATS and off it is astounding.

The problem is that the damage is now done. The idea is out there in the collective consciousness and people will still refer back to it - that or they will say that Ipso is being "politically correct" here, when actually what you have seen is propaganda in action, from a newspaper owned by one of the most dangerous men on the planet who attempts to use editorials to "shock steer" public opinion ih the direction that he wishes them to go.

And its not just this article, there have been many others over the years and - more recently - one entitled "Queen backs BREXIT" which had no substance whatsoever, and was attributed to "unnamed sources" who apparently witnessed an event that no one else can remember and has earned the ire of the palace who lodged an official complaint about it (the Queen famously remains neutral in such matters)

We live in dangerous times, where information is key. Always check, re-check and be wary of your sources.


The sad thing is that it worked. i have read that 1 in 5 thing many many times here on ATS. This wont make any difference. The people who want to believe it to be true will keep spreading it and believing it.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 12:20 AM
link   
Did any of you actually read the wording of the judgement?

Its not quite so black and white as the BBC are portraying it.

Far be it from me to stick up for that rag (I would happily see it go bust and its employees starve, that's how much I despise it) but, the judgement rests on the definition of people going to Syria to fight. Well, they wont be joining Assad and the anti IS forces seem to be (from the documentaries I've watched and articles I've read) non Muslim. The defence against this ruling rested on context, ie that previous questions related to IS and it would be reasonable to assume that the sympathy question also related to them.


Anyway, that's how I read the whole situation.



posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 01:35 AM
link   
a reply to: MagnaCarta2015

Mostly notable the Republicans on social media are using this fake poll and they dont seem want to debate with anyone who question their reality.

The damage is done though.
edit on 29-3-2016 by TaleDawn because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
9

log in

join