The Press Complaints Commission has rejected a complaint from the partner of Stephen Gately over that somewhat controversial column written by Daily Mail waffler Jan Moir.

As much previously reported, the newspaper regulator received a record number of complaints from the public at large over the piece, published just before Gately's funeral, in which Moir basically accused the former Boyzone star of dying from that most evil of diseases, "being gay". Ignoring the fact that, actually, it's not that uncommon for young people to suddenly die from undiagnosed heart conditions, and despite the column itself referencing various heterosexual celebrities with dangerous lifestyles, Moir concluded that Gately's premature demise "strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships".

It wasn't so much offensive, as it was a badly written incoherent argument from a mediocre food critic out of her depth, or, as journalism students would call it, a "Daily Mail opinion piece".

Anyway, after much outrage towards the article, and the timing of its publication, on both Twitter and the blogosphere, the PCC was deluged with complaints, including one from Gately's record label Polydor. However, it was the complaint from the Boyzoner's civil partner Andrew Cowles, submitted a few weeks later, that counted; the PCC only really having a remit to investigate when individuals personally affected by a newspaper article, or close relatives of that individual, make a complaint. Cowle claimed Moir breached three elements of the PCC's code of conduct, by intruding on private grief, by being inaccurate, and by writing homophobic remarks.

But, having now undertaken that investigation, the PCC has ruled that neither Moir nor the Daily Mail did, in fact, break the PCC code by writing and publishing the piece. Although it said it was "uncomfortable with the tenor of the columnist's remarks" and admitted there were flaws in the foodie hack's arguments, it said it feared censuring Moir or the Mail over the piece would represent "a slide towards censorship".

PCC Director Stephen Able added: "It would not be proportionate to rule against the columnist's right to offer freely expressed views about something that was the focus of public attention".

Regarding Cowle's specific complaints, the PCC said that while many complainants felt Moir's negativity towards Gately and Cowles was based on the couple's sexuality, the piece didn't actually contain any "pejorative or prejudicial language"; that while a subsequent post-mortem confirmed the Boyzone star did, indeed, die of natural causes, to describe the death as "unnatural" before the coroner had reported, while highly speculative, wasn't in conflict with the facts available at that time; and that while running the piece the day before Gately's funeral was "in questionable taste", that didn't constitute intruding on private grief.

While the PCC's ruling will probably be unpopular - and may well reignite the debate on how well equipped the body is to regulate the press, given it is funded and overseen by the newspapers themselves - I suspect it is the right decision given the body's remit. I'm not sure Moir did break any PCC rules with her piece - as I say, the piece wasn't so much offensive as it was terribly written. But it's not for the PCC to rule on bad journalism in that way, and with millions of Mail readers seemingly happy to pay for such drivel, I don't suppose there's much anyone can do about it.