Allison in Blunderland (again)
Allison Pearson , Issue 1637

WHEN Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson revealed that police had knocked on her door on Remembrance Sunday claiming she could have committed a "non-crime hate incident", she claimed not to know which of the many, many tweets she has pumped out over the past year it concerned.

But after three days of screeching Telegraph front pages, the post in question was identified – and it turned out to be one that displayed Pearson's characteristic grasp on factual accuracy.

"How dare they," Pearson had written, addressing London's Metropolitan Police, claiming that an attached photograph showed them "smiling with the Jew haters".

In fact, rather than a London protest over Gaza as Pearson assumed, the picture showed Greater Manchester officers alongside people at a demonstration in that city supporting the Pakistani political party led by Imran Khan.

The fact that the word "Pakistan" was clearly visible on the flag the two men of colour in the photo were carrying might have been a clue – but Pearson nevertheless added libelling the pair to the potential offences contained within the 30 words she now describes as "fairly innocuous".

Knacker knock
She also managed to mis-report the police reaction equally incorrectly.

"PC S told me that they were here to inform me that I had been accused of a non-crime hate incident... A non- crime – what the hell?" she told readers, going on to point out: "I was lucky. I have a wonderful platform here at the Telegraph and as a member of the Free Speech Union I can get crucial advice about how to fight back against vexatious NCHIs."

Last weekend Essex Police released a transcript from its officers' body-worn cameras that demonstrated that "at no stage during the short interaction between the woman and our officers was she informed that the report being investigated was being treated as a non-crime hate incident. To suggest otherwise is wholly inaccurate and misleading." The force has backed this up with an accuracy complaint to regulator Ipso.

A pretty comprehensive rebuttal. So were Pearson or the Telegraph (which splashed with the news on its front page), or the legion of other media commentators, former prime ministers and tech moguls who rallied to her defence last week, deterred by it? Er, no.

Pearson, a journalist with 40 years' experience, declared that she might have misheard the officers because she was "pretty shocked", adding on Twitter the supplementary information that she is Welsh and 5ft 4in tall as further evidence that she could not possibly be racist.

Alt-wrong
But, as the Eye has noted in recent years, Pearson has a tendency to rely on Trumpish "alternative facts" for her Telegraph columns, preferring anecdotal accounts from her correspondents and Twitter followers to anything scrupulously sourced.

In October 2023 she relied on her own expertise to overrule the attending fire brigade's conclusion that a devastating fire in a Luton airport car park had not been caused by a lithium-ion battery (Eye 1610).

She has similarly disputed medical professionals' belief that they actually do discharge patients at weekends and Leeds General Infirmary's statement that a child had received substandard treatment in its A&E department, preferring the account of a mysterious "insider" that his parents had staged the episode as a pro-Labour election stunt (Eyes 1540 & 1599).

Show of force
Still, even accounting for the long-standing media rule that something that happens to a journalist is exponentially more important than something that happens to anyone else, there remains an important issue at the heart of all this. The tweet in question was posted a year ago, since when all manner of toxic and inflammatory claims have been made at both street demonstrations and on social media.

The investigation into Pearson has so far reportedly involved three separate police forces, and the setting-up of a "gold group" usually reserved for major incidents.

So why, as with the shocking overreaction to the vigils for Sarah Everard in 2021, do the police appear to reserve their most heavy-handed action for cases in which they themselves are the ones being criticised?

More top stories in the latest issue:

VENI VIDI VARDY
Rebekah Vardy is determined to prove she did not have a special relationship with the Sun – by, er, serving as an I'm A Celebrity commentator for... the Sun.

MAIL HUMAN RIGHTS
The Mail continues to call for the UK to leave the European Convention on Human Rights – despite, er, making use of the convention itself in court.

LAST WRITES
Reach plc's mission to deter the people who are still willing to give them money for copies of their national titles the Mirror and Express each day continues.

SLIM PICKINGS
Sarah Vine has been writing (a lot!) about weight loss drug Ozempic since 2021, but now she is very far from alone in the Street of Shame…

INCENDIARY WORDING
A Times story that excitedly suggested Ukraine "could build a nuclear bomb in months" did not impress the paper's own world affairs editor.

KEEPING IT RIYAL
The Guardian likes to stress that it "doesn't have a billionaire owner" – but ethically questionable funding from billionaires isn't off limits, it seems.

LIBEL NEWS
Former Tory donor Mohamed Amersi continues to splash the cash on expensive libel lawyers in an ongoing battle with the BBC.