Ipso ruling is right

The Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) has ruled that our 2016 investigation into “Football for Sale” was justified in the public interest. Sam Allardyce, the former England manager who was exposed by our journalists as explaining a model that could reasonably be understood to result in a third party benefiting from a player’s transfer, clearly disagreed. He filed at least 15 complaints against our story to Ipso. Ipso took every one of them seriously and rejected all but three.

On those three points, we are happy to provide a correction and apology. As for the rest, Ipso concluded that our use of undercover reporting was “productive and proportionate” and our findings “could reasonably be considered to demonstrate sufficiently serious impropriety” to warrant being published. We are satisfied that we did the right thing given Mr Allardyce’s status. When he resigned, Mr Allardyce acknowledged that he had made an “error in judgment”.

This proves that the independent press regulator is tough and thus state regulation of newspapers is unnecessary. It is also a reminder of what the press exists to do: to hold the powerful to account, expose potential wrongdoing and ensure transparency, honesty and integrity in public life.