A decision by the Irish Farmers' Journal to reprint a section of its latest edition without an article that was critical of the Irish Farmers' Association was "entirely an internal one", the newspaper's editor has said.
Mr Matt Dempsey said he alone decided not to run the article which quoted a number of farmers who opposed the IFA's handling of the controversy about road building on agricultural land.
The farmers said the association should demand the re-routing of roads rather than seek compensation.
Mr Dempsey said: "We had no difficulty with the sentiments expressed, which are no different to what has been expressed before. But it's part of my job to ensure as far as is reasonable that both sides make a contribution, and that there is some balance, and that the Journal is not straying over legal boundaries.
All of these things were bearing down on me when I took the decision on Wednesday."
Up to 80,000 copies of the second section of the Journal, which contained the article, had been printed when the decision was made.
Mr Dempsey declined to say how much it cost to reprint the section with a replacement article but conceded it had been "an expensive lesson".
He said normally he read over the paper ahead of printing each Tuesday "to check for anything that jars badly". Due to engagements this week, however, he only got to see the article on Wednesday, after the print-run.
He said nobody from outside the paper knew about the article and, therefore, "I can absolutely, utterly and categorically say there was no outside influence".
A spokesman for the IFA added: "We would not be in a position to exercise influence on the Journal. There have been some highly critical articles in the past of our road policy in section two (of the paper) and we have no problem with criticism in the Journal or elsewhere."
Referring to the presence of both the IFA's president, Mr Tom Parlon, and general secretary, Mr Michael Berkery, on the "agricultural trust" which owns the newspaper, the spokesman said: "It's a widely-held belief that we run the Journal. But we always have been just one voice on the board of the trust so we would not be in a position to have this happen."
