Rules
How IPSO and the Editors' Code apply to magazine editorial decisions in Britain
A guide to how IPSO and the Editors' Code affect magazine editorial decisions, covering accuracy, privacy, corrections, right of reply, and production checks.
What to take away
- IPSO applies the Editors' Code of Practice to member magazines, and each published ruling names the title, the clause and the breach.
- Clause 1 drives most magazine complaints and covers headlines, standfirsts, captions and pictures, not only body copy.
- Clause 1(ii) requires prompt correction with due prominence. Clause 1(iii) requires a fair opportunity to reply.
- A member publisher normally has 28 days to answer a complaint, which should arrive within 12 months of publication.
What IPSO is and which clauses decide magazine complaints
IPSO, the Independent Press Standards Organisation, replaced the Press Complaints Commission in 2014. Membership is voluntary. Members agree to answer complaints and to publish any adverse ruling.
It applies the Editors' Code of Practice, a 16-clause document written by the industry. The Independent Press Standards Organisation entry explains the regulator's structure before you read the Code.
| Clause | What it covers | Where complaints land |
|---|---|---|
| 1 Accuracy | Significant inaccuracies; headlines, captions, pictures | Cover lines, standfirsts, single-source claims |
| 2 Privacy | Private life, home, health, correspondence | Long-lens photographs, health features |
| 3 Harassment | Pursuit after a request to stop | Repeated approaches to a subject |
| 6 Children | Under-16s, welfare and consent | School, family and health features |
| 12 Discrimination | Protected characteristics, unless genuinely relevant | Columns, jokes, opinion asides |
Clause 12 overlaps with statute. The duties the Equality Act places on UK digital magazine publishers cover the legal side. Adjudications are published in full, with the clause number and the reasoning, in IPSO's public rulings archive.
For example, IPSO ruled in 2019 that The Spectator breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) in a 2018 article about a study on transgender children. The magazine had misstated the study's findings. IPSO required a correction with due prominence, and The Spectator published it. The case shows editors that a misread study claim can trigger a Clause 1 ruling.
How a complaint moves from receipt to adjudication
The complaint goes to IPSO, not to the magazine. The person affected does not need a lawyer.
- Remit check. IPSO confirms membership and that the article falls inside the scheme, print and regulated online output.
- Publisher response. The title normally has 28 days to answer in substance, with the reporting trail attached.
- Assessment. IPSO decides whether the case needs investigation or can settle between the parties.
- Complaints Committee. The Committee rules on the clause and the remedy.
- Outcome. Most cases close as a negotiated resolution; a minority become a published adjudication.
IPSO complaint to adjudication
- Complaint received and remit checked
- Publisher notified and asked to respond
- Case assessed; correction or clarification
- Investigation opened; both sides exchange evidence
- Complaints Committee decides; outcome published
Correction cases can close in weeks. Contested privacy cases typically run for months.
A magazine editorial workflow that keeps the brief, the fact-check notes and the picture permissions in one folder decides how fast a publisher can answer at stage two.
Headline, caption and picture rulings
Headlines produce the most accuracy rulings. A headline that states as fact what the copy only suggests breaches clause 1, even when the body text is careful.
Pictures carry the same duty. A library image of a named person, set beside a headline the text does not support, implies something the article never says. A caption with the wrong date is an inaccuracy in its own right.
Headline and picture checks
- Does the headline state more than the copy supports?
- Would a reader who saw only the headline be misled?
- Is the picture of the person named, and current?
- Does the caption add a claim the article does not make?
- Has the subject been given a chance to reply?
Privacy, harassment and the public interest
Privacy complaints usually involve health, relationships, money or a person's home. A public place does not remove a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Clause 3 covers repeated approaches. Once a subject asks a reporter to stop, continuing can breach the clause even when every contact is polite.
A magazine brand that also produces audio or video answers to the broadcast code for that output. The BBC editorial guidelines show how a broadcaster writes those standards down.
Corrections, clarifications and the right of reply
The Code sets the remedy:
A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and where appropriate an apology published.
Due prominence means the correction is as visible as the claim. A letters page note does not answer a cover line. An online correction belongs on the article.
Most clause 1 complaints trace back to sourcing. A copy editing and fact-checking problems review catches the thin single-source claim at proof, before it becomes a 28-day response.
A prompt correction can also cut exposure if the subject later sues for defamation. The overview of defamation explains why wording and timing both matter.
Right of reply means putting the specific allegations to the subject with time to answer. A day-before-deadline email is not a fair opportunity.
Example: the shape of a clause 1 correction
Published rulings differ, but the shape repeats. A profile states that a company lost a contract, on the word of one source never asked for the paperwork. The subject complains under clause 1.
In the 28-day response, the editor concedes the sourcing gap and offers a correction in the same section, online and in the next issue. The case closes at assessment.
Building IPSO checks into the production schedule
Compliance is cheapest at commissioning. A short check per issue beats a legal read of every page.
- Commissioning briefname the subject, the claims needing evidence, and the people to approach for comment.
- Fact-checkconfirm each significant claim against a named source, and check quotes against the recording.
- Legal readtreat the headline, standfirst, captions and pictures as claims in their own right.
- Right of replyrecord the date the allegations went out and the deadline given.
A magazine editorial release checklist stops this pass slipping when an issue runs late.
