“Full Fact is an independent fact-checker. We help understand the facts and context behind the claims of leading figures in UK political debate, and pressure those making misleading claims to correct the record,” fullfact.org states under a bold headline: “Promoting accuracy in the public debate.”
Dig a little deeper and this intriguing little non-profit organisation, led by Conservative donor and chairman of the Anne Freud Centre, Michael Samuel, becomes quite fascinating indeed – particularly for those concerned about proper investigative journalism, the truth and the travesty that was the Leveson Inquiry.
Full facts, or fake facts (we think that's a better term), are Post an article on your website On July 3, 2012, after the British newspaper Column warned the public about unjust and illegal imprisonment, British Constitutional Law Group Chancellor Roger Hayes was accused of withholding council tax. The Fullfact article was quick to show its aggressive bias, describing the UK column's report as a “conspiracy theory”.
In fact, we correctly and accurately reported that there was no list of participants in the court hearing and that Mr. Hayes did not have a lawyer and was not allowed to have one. Mr. Hayes was not given the opportunity to present a defence, no jury was present and no members of the public or press were present. Furthermore, an earlier court hearing was held without Mr. Hayes's full knowledge. As he was never informed of this hearing, Mr. Hayes was unable to attend and was unable to present a defence. Welcome to British justice.
These are true facts, confirmed and recounted by our reporters who visited Mr Hayes in prison, and so the UK column accurately reported what happened and accurately described the trial proceedings as a “star chamber” – a secret trial process.
Will Moy's FullFact article proudly boasts of its self-appointed role as an “independent fact-checking organisation”.
FullFact was not present at Wirral Magistrates' Court yesterday, but certainly neither were the people who published these impossible claims.
Either lacking the necessary intellectual acumen to understand the events at Wirral Court or attempting to further a political agenda against Mr Hayes and the British Constitution Group, Moi simply ignored the gravity of what had happened in the proceedings and falsely titled his article “Secret Courts and Summary Trials? Not So Much…”.
Mr Moy has further demonstrated bias and sloppy journalism by only investigating one side of the case and simply accepting the word of Her Majesty's Court and Wirral Council as the truth.
The explanation given by the Council and supported by the Court is consistent with the law and, despite claims of a “secret” trial, the facts are readily available to anyone willing to investigate the matter. Therefore, this particular conspiracy theory needs to be put to rest.
Moy then cited the “direct.gov.uk” website as to “what should have happened” at Hayes' trial, sealing the fate of the truth with a classic example of “lazy web-based journalism”. Worryingly for the general public, Moy is not knowledgeable on both the facts and the law.
After the UK column complained to FullFact about the quality of the article, and despite being assured there was an appropriate complaints procedure, Moi responded personally, defending his article and its accuracy – a defense which was later updated and corroborated twice on the FullFact site.
Following complaints from supporters of Mr Hayes, Full Fact has reviewed this article and stands by the accuracy of its contents. In line with our policy, the article includes citations and is available for any reader to review. However, we have amended the article in three ways. Firstly, to clarify that the reason Mr Hayes was jailed was because he “refusal” to pay Council Tax, which is not Full Fact's choice of words. Secondly, to clarify that the first hearing was last Thursday, not last Tuesday. Thirdly, to amend the wording in response to complaints that the original wording of the article seemed to downplay the concerns expressed about Mr Hayes' experience on Monday. This was not our intention and Full Fact does not take a position on the merits of anyone's case or political views.
FullFact's statement is at best dishonest and at worst a lie, but it fails to acknowledge that its original reporting of the facts was incorrect. Despite being informed that the original article was in the UK column and not the Archbishop Cramer Blog, and despite receiving a complaint from the UK column, Conservative donor Samuel's FullFact team did not publish this fact or address the core facts of Mr Hayes' case or the circumstances of his imprisonment.
So why would FullFact do this? Once again, the FullFact website seems to provide a strong clue, as it states:
We have already successfully pressured Parliament and the national press to correct inaccurate claims, and our work has been quoted by Government Ministers, Opposition Leaders and influential journalists and commentators.
He also strongly supported the Leveson Inquiry, saying:
If journalists continue to fudge the truth, the Leveson Inquiry will fail.
Is FullFact independent? Few would think so, given the usual list of core funders: the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, the Nuffield Foundation, the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation. These are the very same funders of the Media Standards Trust. And they are all agents of change.
Coincidence? It's another coincidence that Joseph O'Leary joined FullFact after interning at the Media Standards Trust, where he helped manage Journalisted.com and supported the Orwell Prize and the Hacked Off campaign for a public inquiry into phone tapping and journalistic ethics – Hacked Off is, of course, the very same campaign that helped “launch” the Levenson Inquiry that FullFacts is now promoting.
Will Moy and Martin Moore of the Leveson Inquiry
But what of Will Moy? This interesting young man appears to have no substantial experience in journalism or the media. His “experience” dates back to his time as an assistant to a junior crossbench MP, working on regulatory legislation in some (unspecified) areas. Yet he was called to give evidence at the Leveson Inquiry. A highly placed friend?
Seated next to Martin Moore, director of the Media Standards Trust, Will spoke passionately to Leveson about ethics and standards in the press and media.
It's not that all journalism is unreliable, or even that most journalists are unreliable, but because enough journalism by enough journalists is unreliable, it makes no sense for the public to trust journalism…Good journalism is devalued by recklessly inaccurate journalism.
This article began with Full Fact's inaccurate and unreliable reporting on the imprisonment of Roger Hayes, so no award can be given to Moi on that score. But Full Fact's real hypocrisy begins with Moi's failure to tell the public who were attending the Leveson Inquiry.
Certainly the public should be fully informed of the fact that Sir David Bell, a senior member of the Leveson Panel and Roadshow, is a trustee of Common Purpose, a trustee of the Media Standards Trust (who reportedly resigned because of Leveson), and a senior director of Esmee Fairbairn, the organisation which funds both Full Fact and the Media Standards Trust.
It's great that Bell can invite his comrades to speak at Leveson and Moi can be hypocritical enough to blame the mainstream professional press and media for the flaws exposed in Full Fact. Truth, integrity, standards, facts? No, surely it's just fake facts and an attempt to manipulate the press and media establishment?
