The Daily Record has had to apologise after running a piece on its website headlined “Celtic safe standing announcement branded ‘insensitive’ by Hillsborough campaigner”.
The article claimed that a “Hillsborough campaigner” had “slammed” the Glasgow football team for the “insensitive” timing of its announcement.
But the Record later deleted the story, published on 5 May, and the following day carried what it called “a clarification”.
It stated that Celtic’s chief executive, Peter Lawwell, “did not make any announcement regarding safe standing on 4 May as we had reported. We apologise for this error and are happy to set the record straight.”
Publication came just ahead of Sunday’s visit to Celtic Park by members of the Hillsborough Justice Campaign. There has been a close affinity between Liverpool FC and Celtic since the latter’s staging of a memorial match two weeks after the tragedy in 1989 in which 96 people lost their lives.
So who was the “Hillsborough campaigner” cited in the Record story? It transpired that it was Margaret Aspinall, chair of the Hillsborough Family Support Group. But did she have the correct information before she was quoted? See my Daily Telegraph reference below.
There is no doubt about Celtic’s intention to introduce safe-standing because, as the club’s website reported in June last year, it has received city council permission to provide “rail seats” for season ticket holders from next season.
The BBC also reported that fact, pointing out that the new arrangement for about 2,600 supporters is “based on versatile seating common at German grounds.”
Significantly, its article made no mention of a new announcement or a Hillsborough campaigner.
PS: A tweeter pointed rightly to the fact that a similar story was published on the Daily Telegraph site. It quoted Margaret Aspinall as saying: “It’s insensitive to announce that right at this time, a week just after the [inquest] verdicts. It’s very insensitive.” But, since it wasn’t announced, she was clearly responding after being told that it had been.
PPS: I was originally informed that the campaigner was not named but, with the Record having deleted the story, I was unable to check what transpired to be incorrect information.
