Daily Mail apologises for Katie Hopkins “extremist” slur

The Daily Mail and its regular columnist Katie Hopkins have apologised for an article she wrote a year ago, in which she suggested that two brothers, Mohammed Tariq Mahmood and Mohammed Zahid Mahmood, were extremists linked to Al Qaeda.

The apology appears on the Daily Mail website and is headlined “The Mahmood family – an apology”. It reads:

“An article published in Katie Hopkins’ column on 23 December 2015 (‘Just because Britain’s border security is a Mickey Mouse operation you can’t blame America for not letting this lot travel to Disneyland – I wouldn’t either’) suggested that Mohammed Tariq Mahmood and his brother, Mohammed Zahid Mahmood, are extremists with links to Al Qaeda; that their purported reason for visiting the USA – namely to visit Disneyland – was a lie; and that US Homeland Security were right to prevent them from boarding their flight. We are happy to make clear that Tariq Mahmood and Zahid Mahmood are not extremists, nor do they have links to Al Qaeda. They were travelling to the USA with their families to see one of their brothers for a holiday in California and they had indeed planned to visit Disneyland as part of their trip.
“In addition a further article in Katie’s column on 29 December (‘A brave Muslim tried to warn us their week about the extremists taking over his community. What a tragedy it is that our PC politicians would rather not know’) suggested that Hamza Mahmood (Mohammed Tariq Mahmood’s son) was responsible for a Facebook page which allegedly contained extremist material. Our article included a photo of the family home. Hamza Mahmood has pointed out that he is not responsible for the Facebook page, which was linked to him as a result of an error involving his email address. We are happy to make clear that there is no suggestion that either Hamza nor Taeeba or Hafsa Mahmood (Hamza’s mother and sister) have any links to extremism.
“We and Katie Hopkins apologise to the Mahmood family for the distress and embarrassment caused and have agreed to pay them substantial damages and their legal costs.”

The apology is welcome, not least because of the tone of the article. However, readers are left wondering why it has taken nearly a year for the apology to be made and why the brothers had to take legal action in order to persuade the Daily Mail to print the truth. Even if Ms Hopkins thought it was acceptable to refer to a Muslim family as “this lot”, did no one else at the paper question the tone of the article? Even if Ms Hopkins thought that their intention to visit Disneyland had to be a cover story for some other intention, did no one else at the paper ask her if she had checked her facts?

The Mahmood family have issued a statement welcoming the apology and pointing out that “matters are not helped when such sensationalist and, frankly, Islamophobic articles such as this are published, and which caused us all a great deal of distress and anxiety.”

At least the family has secured, at last, an apology from the Daily Mail. They are still waiting to hear why the US authorities did not let them go to Disneyland…

[Adverts]