Phil, as with everything, things are rarely black and white. If someone came to me with a story like the one you have suggested, allegations against family etc I would never go to print unless I could stack it up with an official body like the police. Even then we'd have to be very careful. Newspapers have strict guidelines to adhere to, not only legally, but the Press Complaints Commission says local papers must publish responsibly.
If for example someone came to me and said he had been attacked in the street, I would have to get it checked out with the police first to make sure he wasn't making it up.
Prior has made a serious allegation, and the Echo have decided to go to print. Their legal defence would be that they took Prior's word in good faith and that they published without malice and in the public interest. They wrote a balanced article which obtained comments from the club before publishing. Ron may get them on factual inaccuracies if there were any but as I say, the Echo would have had to consider this carefully before going to print. Ron suggests they knew there were inaccuracies, which I severely doubt seeing as it would make no sense whatsoever.
Agreed but you know as well as I do that newspapers rarely give their 'targets' enough time to fully respond to the allegations they are about to print. You know what they do: ('We tried to reach Ron in his office at 2am in the morning, 5 mins before going to print).
There is a good reason for this which I explained in my post. The Echo get to sell a load more copies by putting this kind of story on the front page. They may then have to apologise or retract their comments when the facts become known, by way of a tiny apology on a slow news day, but by then the damage is done.
People, including fans who do not go on the OS or look at this site, will forever have yesterday's headlines etched in their minds, even if it turns out to be false. (It looks like there are already some serious inaccuracies).
It is fortunate for Ron that he is able to give his side of the story to a lot of the people who matter the most, otherwise the Echo's apology would go unnoticed by the majority.
If it turns out the Echo have deliberately printed an article which they knew to be inaccurate, or if it can be proved that they acted in an improper manner by not allowing enough time to get the full facts, then I hope he sues their a**es. At the very least it will make them think twice before they print lies about Ron, or anyone else for that matter. And their insurers will bump up their premiums ten fold!
Also, do you think maybe they did act in Malice? There is a bit of history between the club and Ron. And, although they could say the story is in the public's interest, it is not such an important story whereby another day or two to establish the facts would have made any difference to the article.
One final point, I think there is a good possibility that Little Havens first approached the Echo with the story, not Spinner. This might not mean much at first glance, but could mean a lot!
By the way, are you sure you're not Chris Phillips?
