okay, I'll address the last comment first and move backwards.
Doug: The story is 100 per cent factually correct. Tell me what is inaccurate.
Councillor Shiel mentioned that he'd heard of the existence of such a website...he never gave the impression he'd seen it. I found it directly.
How have we made an error of judgement? As I've said before: the contentof the story is the end responsibility of the editor and I know what he is likely to allow to be in and what he is likely to exclude on the grounds of taste or ambiguity.
How is it an 'old' story? The councillor was asking this week 'where are the gates?' The council said this week the gates will be up in the next few weeks.
Whether the story is distateful or not is your opinion. The fact that it is going on at all may be interprted by some as distasteful. Again, how the editor chooses to present it is up to him.
If we presentented accurate information sensatiionally - great. We're paid to make articles as readable as possible.
With regards to the purpose that it serves:The article has arguably helped speed up the amount of time it will take to get the gate to keep out all but those who have keys.
How is it shaming local residents?
Who would you like to apologise and what for? We work to the Press Complaints Commission code of conduct. Tell me what rule we have broken in it and I'll personally apologise to you, Doug
Garinda - the Observer may be in tabloid form, but we are not in the same ilk as the daily nationals. We consider ourselves a family newspaper. The Sun doesn't have Junior League etc.
I agree with the rest of what you said in your most recent post (but again, it's all in the editor's hands) apart from the bit about "all to sell papers". Our main aim is to write stories to inform, entertain and present things that are in the public interest. You don't sell papers otherwise.
Garinda - as for your first post. with all due respect, how do you know what the story is based on "one anonymous posting?"
At the start of last year residents attended Huncoat Are Council to complain about this going on, we quoted it at the time.
They then went back to the area council to try to get a gate. Another resident then told Lancashire County Council about the problem in October...again we quoted them.
Councillors, council workers and residents have all gone in the record in the past about sexual activity going on on the site. I spoke one resident yesterday morning who said his children and grandchildren were having to walk/drive past couples in cars to get to home to his farm.
Yes it does merit a front-page story - look how much reaction we've had. It's the talk of the town. Sex always is.
Madhatter - those residents will get their gate to block off the track...that's what they've been ask for for 12 months. Yes, I do think this land is used for dogging.