How to Make or Respond to a Press Complaint in the UK

The UK Press Regulation Landscape

Since the collapse of the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) in 2014 following the Leveson Inquiry, UK press self-regulation has been split between two bodies:

• IPSO (Independent Press Standards Organisation) — the larger regulator, covering most national newspapers (including The Sun, Daily Mail, The Times, and The Daily Telegraph), the majority of regional papers, and many online publishers. IPSO regulates against the Editors' Code of Practice.
• IMPRESS (The Independent Monitor for the Press) — a Royal Charter-recognised regulator covering a smaller set of publishers, primarily community news outlets, independent digital publishers, and specialist titles. IMPRESS regulates against its own IMPRESS Standards Code.

Broadcast journalism — TV and radio — is regulated by Ofcom under the Broadcasting Code, which is a statutory framework with different rules and processes. Major national newspapers (including The Guardian, Financial Times, and The Independent) are not members of any self-regulatory body and handle complaints directly through their internal editors' code teams.

The IPSO Complaints Process

Who Can Complain to IPSO?

IPSO accepts complaints from:

• Individuals directly affected by the publication complained of (first-party complaints)
• Third parties, but only in limited circumstances — for example, where the public interest is at stake or where those directly affected are vulnerable
• Representative groups, in cases involving discriminatory coverage affecting a group

Complaints must relate to a publication that is a current member of IPSO. You can check membership on the IPSO website. Complaints must normally be submitted within four months of the date of publication (or, if coverage is ongoing, within four months of the last relevant article).

Grounds for Complaint

Complaints must allege a breach of the Editors' Code of Practice. The most commonly cited clauses are:

The IPSO Complaints Timeline

1. Raise directly with the publisher first (recommended): IPSO encourages complainants to contact the publication's internal complaints team before approaching IPSO. Most publications have a dedicated complaints email; many will resolve straightforward accuracy complaints at this stage.
2. Submit to IPSO: If the publication does not respond satisfactorily within 28 days (or within a reasonable time), submit a formal complaint via IPSO's online form. Complaints must specify the relevant code clauses and explain the alleged breach clearly.
3. Mediation / Executive Complaints: IPSO will approach the publication and attempt a negotiated resolution. This typically involves a correction, clarification, or right of reply. Most complaints are resolved at this stage.
4. Regulatory Adjudication: Where mediation fails, the complaint is referred to the IPSO Complaints Committee, which will issue a formal ruling — either upholding or rejecting the complaint. This process typically takes 3–6 months from submission.
5. Appeal: Both complainants and publishers can appeal to the IPSO Independent Reviewer if they believe a procedural error occurred. An appeal is not a re-hearing of the merits; it focuses on whether IPSO followed its own procedures correctly.

The IMPRESS Complaints Process

IMPRESS operates a broadly similar complaints process but with some significant differences:

• Low-cost arbitration: As a Royal Charter-recognised regulator, IMPRESS offers a low-cost arbitration service. Under section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, publishers that belong to a Royal Charter regulator benefit from costs protection in defamation and privacy cases — a significant incentive for publishers to join IMPRESS.
• Complaints handling: Like IPSO, IMPRESS encourages direct resolution with the publisher first. Formal complaints are assessed against the IMPRESS Standards Code, which covers accuracy, privacy, harassment, discrimination, and sources.
• Timeline: IMPRESS aims to resolve most complaints within 35 days.
• Appeal: IMPRESS complaints can be appealed to an independent appeal panel.

Ofcom Complaints for Broadcast Journalism

For television and radio journalism, Ofcom is the statutory regulator. Its Broadcasting Code covers accuracy, impartiality, privacy, fairness, harm and offence, and protection of under-18s. Key differences from the IPSO process:

• Ofcom has statutory powers and can impose significant financial sanctions on broadcasters — fines can reach up to 5% of a broadcaster's qualifying revenue, or £250,000 for a single breach
• Ofcom operates a two-stage process: initially assessing whether a complaint raises a potential code issue, and then conducting a formal investigation if it does
• Broadcasters must have their own internal complaints procedures, and Ofcom will generally not intervene until these have been exhausted
• Complaints about on-demand content (e.g. VOD services) are handled separately under the ODPS framework

Ofcom complaints can be submitted via the Ofcom website or by post. The process is free and there is no fee for either party.

How Journalists Should Respond to Complaints

Receiving a complaint — whether directly from a subject or formally via IPSO — can be stressful. A structured approach helps:

1. Acknowledge promptly: Respond to any complaint within a few working days to acknowledge receipt, even if a full response takes longer. Silence reads as indifference and can escalate situations unnecessarily.
2. Review the journalism: Honestly assess whether the complaint has merit. Consult your notes, recordings, documents, and sources. Was the information accurate? Were all relevant parties given adequate opportunity to respond?
3. Consult your editor and legal team: Do not respond substantively to formal legal correspondence (including pre-action letters from solicitors) without involving your publication's legal team. Even if you are confident the article is correct, a hasty response can prejudice the legal position.
4. Consider a voluntary correction: If an error was made, issuing a prompt correction is almost always the right course. Early corrections tend to de-escalate complaints before they reach IPSO. Under the Editors' Code, corrections must be given due prominence.
5. Engage constructively with IPSO mediation: If a complaint reaches IPSO, engage in good faith with the mediation process. A negotiated resolution is almost always preferable to a public adjudication.
6. Document everything: Keep a contemporaneous record of all complaint correspondence, editorial discussions, and decisions made during the complaint process.

Preventing Complaints: Best Practice

Most complaints can be avoided through rigorous editorial practice before publication:

• Always seek comment: Give subjects of critical coverage a genuine opportunity to respond, with a reasonable deadline. Record the request and their response (or non-response) in your notes.
• Verify facts independently: Do not rely solely on a single source for factual claims, especially serious allegations.
• Be precise: Vague or ambiguous phrasing is a common source of accuracy complaints. Say exactly what you mean.
• Handle distress sensitively: When approaching bereaved, traumatised, or otherwise vulnerable individuals, follow the provisions of the Editors' Code and the NUJ Code of Conduct.
• Keep detailed notes: Notes, recordings, and contemporaneous documentation are your primary defence against accuracy complaints. Retain them indefinitely for significant stories.
• Review privacy carefully: Before publishing information about private individuals, assess whether there is a genuine public interest that outweighs their privacy interests.

For a broader framework of ethical obligations, see our ethics guide.

Complaint Statistics: What the Data Shows

IPSO publishes annual statistics on complaints received and outcomes. Key patterns from recent annual reports:

• IPSO typically receives 15,000–20,000 enquiries per year, of which around 2,000–3,000 proceed as formal complaints
• Accuracy (Clause 1) is consistently the most complained-about clause, accounting for around 60–70% of all formal complaints
• Privacy (Clause 2) and Harassment (Clause 3) together account for most of the remainder
• The majority of formal complaints — typically around 85–90% — are resolved through direct mediation between the complainant and the publisher, without reaching a formal adjudication
• Of those cases that do proceed to formal adjudication, complaints are upheld in roughly 30–40% of cases
• IPSO's Arbitration Service (for defamation and privacy) has seen growing use since its introduction

IPSO vs IMPRESS vs Ofcom: A Quick Comparison