In the column, Jeremy Clarkson wrote that he was 'dreaming of the day when [Meghan] is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while crowds chant, "Shame!" and throw lumps of excrement at her'. Photo / Getty Images
In the column, Jeremy Clarkson wrote that he was 'dreaming of the day when [Meghan] is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while crowds chant, "Shame!" and throw lumps of excrement at her'. Photo / Getty Images
The Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) received a record 25,100 complaints from the public after Clarkson wrote in The Sun that he would like to see the Duchess paraded naked through the streets while crowds threw excrement at her.
The Duchess was not one of those who complained, however, and legal experts said Ipso risked being manipulated by “heavily politicised” groups if it accepted third party complaints on such matters.
Clarkson apologised for the column within days of it appearing last December, and The Sun removed it from its website after less than a week.
While Ipso ruled that the column did amount to sexism, it rejected complaints that the article was racist, inaccurate, or harassed the Duchess.
The Sun has agreed to publish Ipso’s findings in the slot that would normally be reserved for Clarkson’s Saturday column.
Ipso said Meghan Markle 'raised no objection' to the press organisation ruling on the third-party complaints. Photo / AP
No other complaint of sexism has been upheld by Ipso since it was formed in 2014 as a successor organisation to the Press Complaints Commission.
Ipso’s own rules state that it cannot investigate complaints of discrimination made by third parties unless a “representative group” makes a complaint that it considers to have considerable public interest attached.
In the case of the Duchess, Ipso decided to look into complaints made by the gender equality group The Fawcett Society – whose incoming chairman is Harriet Harman, the Labour MP – and the Wilde Foundation, which campaigns for female empowerment.
Ipso contacted the Duchess, who “raised no objection” to it ruling on the third-party complaints, according to the watchdog, and so it went ahead with an investigation.
‘All women harmed’
The Fawcett Society made its complaint on the basis that: “All women are harmed if any woman is the target of sexist reporting.”
Harman said: “Women are no longer prepared to endure the sexism that generations of women have been subjected to. Fawcett will be vigilant about sexism in the media and challenge it wherever it appears. This is a big step forward for women in the battle against sexism in the media.”
The Sun said in a statement: “The Sun accepts that with free expression comes responsibility.
“Half of The Sun’s readers are women and we have a very long and proud history of campaigning for women which has changed the lives of many.
“The Sun is committed to its work campaigning to strengthen legislation on domestic abuse, helping to provide beds in refuges and empowering survivors of abuse to seek help.”
Ipso said in its ruling that the article included a number of references to the Duchess’s sex, including a claim that the Duchess “exercised power via her sexual hold over her husband” and that to argue that a woman is in a position of influence due to “vivid bedroom promises”, amounted to a breach of the Editors’ Code.
Lord Faulks, the chairman of Ipso, said: “This was a serious breach of the Editors’ Code of Practice. We ruled that in this article The Sun published a pejorative and prejudicial reference to the Duchess of Sussex’s sex … we found that the imagery employed by the columnist in this article was humiliating and degrading toward the Duchess.
“Ipso’s purpose is to protect the public and freedom of expression by upholding high editorial standards. In this case, The Sun failed to meet these standards.”
