A'cover-up' job at the Guardian

You have to smile about Elizabeth Ribbans, Managing Director at the Guardian, for she states "We have been unable to find a record of his first email but the second was received and unfortunately not actioned". She is lying her 'socks-off' for if you read the first paragraph of my second email to the Guardian dated 14 April it states I sent a email on the 30 March to the Readers Editor and others, also I quote from the 'automated' reply I received the same day (30 March) which they tell you is proof of it being received.

"Dear Sir
On the 30/3/11 I emailed Jon Robins and cc'd the same to yourself at the Guardian and others but all have failed to respond (link to said email below).
Let me quote from your "automatically generated email" reply: -
"This office handles reader queries about Guardian accuracy and standards.
... we do aim to read them all
It is the Guardian's policy to correct significant errors as soon as possible.
If you have sent a correction request we will not usually send you a response unless the article directly affects you."

I suppose we should not believe everything we read or we should take with a 'pinch of salt' everything the Guardian states or publishes!"

In my email to Rebecca Hales at the Press Complaints Commission on the 15 May in section '1' I show it was clear 'Hogwash' what Elizabeth Ribbans had said and obviously she was doing a 'cover-up' job.

"My dissatisfactions are many.
The Guardian published Jon Robins article on the 25 Mar 2011, I emailed Jon Robins and the Guardian five days later, 30 Mar (auto reply shows it was received on the same day), a second email was sent on the 15 April and all were ignored. Six weeks later on the 9 May, after you contacted the Guardian, they took some action, even so they said it was still then only after an email was received from the Journalist, too little too late. Let me again quote the Guardian "correct significant errors as soon as possible", it seems their excuse appears to be a lack of their in-house communications, and that is no excuse for what happened. For the Guardian to say "We have been unable to find a record of his first email..." being that of the 30 Mar when I had received an automated reply on the same day and when Jon Robins eventually replied on the 12 May (after 6 weeks) with a copy of the said email showing all addresses it was sent to, clearly shows the Guardians statement of having no 'record' is pure 'Hogwash' to make it look as though they didn't know about my complaint 'til mid April and the excuse they give of "unfortunately not actioned" is not acceptable and wouldn't stand-up in a Court of law"

The Guardian's Readers Editor emails Rebecca Hales on the 19 May and with the evidence to show my email was received by him on the 30 March they had to put their hands up and admit it but now its "We were in the process of switching email packages..." (I wonder who thinks up these excuses).

The Guardian's Readers Editor, Chris Elliot, below states "...we deal with scores of corrections every week..." and Elizabeth Ribbans, Managing Director at the Guardian, states "Our Readers Editor receives 25,000 queries a year..." no doubt a conservative estimate but 'corrections' or 'queries' at their own figures it averages nearly 500 a week, they must spent all their time correcting their 'lies' or denying they made any or trying to 'worm' their way out of them.

Back . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Top