July 11, 2014updated 14 Jul 2014 1:22pm

‘They’ve exposed themselves as the worst kind of tabloid’: George Clooney rejects Mail apology

George Clooney has rejected Mail Online’s apology for a false story about his prospective mother-in-law and accused the title of knowing it was a lie.

Writing for USA Today, Clooney has described the Daily Mail as “the worst kind of tabloid” and accused it of a “coverup”.

Earlier this week, Mail Online removed a story which alleged Clooney’s prosective mother-in-law had been telling “half of Beirut” that she was against the wedding between Clooney and her daughter Amal Alamuddin.

Clooney said: "The irresponsibility, in this day and age, to exploit religious differences where none exist, is at the very least negligent and more appropriately dangerous. We have family members all over the world, and the idea that someone would inflame any part of that world for the sole reason of selling papers should be criminal."

A Mail Online spokesman said at the time that the story was “not a fabrication but supplied in good faith by a reputable and trusted freelance journalist”.

They added:"However, we accept Mr Clooney’s assurance that the story is inaccurate and we apologise to him, Miss Amal Alamuddin and her mother, Baria, for any distress caused.

"We have removed the article from our website and will be contacting Mr Clooney’s representatives to discuss giving him the opportunity to set the record straight."

But Clooney rejected the apology, writing in USA Today.

He said: "There is one constant when a person or company is caught doing something wrong. The coverup is always worse.

"In this case, the Daily Mail has printed an apology for insinuating religious tensions where there are none. In the apology, managing editor Charles Garside claims that the article was "not a fabrication," but "based the story on conversations with senior members of the Lebanese community.""

But Clooney said "none of that is true" and questioned the paper's use of a "family friend" as a source. He pointed to another Mail story which contradicted the complained-about article and said: "The Mail knew the story in question was false and printed it anyway."

He added: "What separates this from all of the ridiculous things the Mail makes up is that now, by their own admission, it can be proved to be a lie. In fact, a premeditated lie.

"So I thank the Mail for its apology. Not that I would ever accept it, but because in doing so they've exposed themselves as the worst kind of tabloid.

"One that makes up its facts to the detriment of its readers and to all the publications that blindly reprint them."