What a shock - the Daily Telegraph inaccurate, surely not?
Another surprise!
1 Like
Industry Super Australia/The Australian
The Press Council has considered a complaint from Industry Super Australia about an article in The Australian on 3 December 2015, headed “Industry Super must be taken to task”. The article said industry super funds’ “supply chains are tightly held by union-related entities — in relation to funds management, investment, financial advice and custodial services” and that “[t]he market is never tested because doing business with union mates is so much easier, it would seem”.
The Council considered that although the article was headed “COMMENT” in print and “OPINION” online, the statement in the article that industry super funds’ “supply chains are tightly held by union-related entities — in relation to funds management, investment, financial advice and custodial services" was expressed as a statement of fact and not merely an expression of the author’s opinion. The Council considered it meant that union-related entities dominated each of the named supply areas. The Council was satisfied on the material available that the publication failed to take reasonable steps to ensure this statement was accurate and not misleading.
The Council considered the statement that “[t]he market is never tested because doing business with union mates is so much easier” was also presented as a statement of fact, notwithstanding the addition of the words “it would seem”. The Council considered that the publication did not take reasonable steps to ensure this statement was accurate and not misleading, having regard to its definite terms. Accordingly, the publication also breached General Principle 1 in this respect.
As the publication offered a balancing opinion piece in response, given the nature and context of the material, the Council considered that the publication took reasonable steps to provide adequate remedial action. Accordingly, it did not consider that General Principles 2 and 4 were breached.
Australian Press Council launches its first Reconciliation Action Plan
The Australian Press Council has launched its first-ever Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP), which documents the objectives and strategies that the organisation will employ over the next two years to promote understanding and reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians.
The Chair of the Press Council, Professor David Weisbrot AM, other Council members, Indigenous community leaders and representatives of a range of other organisations celebrated the launch at the National Centre for Indigenous Excellence in Redfern, NSW.
The Press Council’s draft RAP was developed in 2016 and submitted to Reconciliation Australia for review, in accordance with established processes. It has now been endorsed and becomes an official Press Council policy document.
“Reconciliation Australia gave us very strong support throughout the process, working patiently with us as we developed a plan appropriate for an organisation like ours that operates in the media sphere.” Professor Weisbrot said. "We could not have done this without their expertise and wisdom.
"Our member publications tell Australia’s story, including both the hardships faced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and their successes, and this RAP is one way of ensuring that Indigenous people and perspectives are involved in shaping that narrative.
“The challenge now is to make sure that we implement these ambitious plans fully and effectively. We have already taken the first steps. We recently welcomed the Koori Mail as our first Indigenous member publication, we will announce shortly the name of our first Indigenous Council member and we are now sourcing goods and services from Indigenous suppliers.”
The CEO of Reconciliation Australia, Justin Mohamed, said: “Reconciliation Australia congratulates the Press Council on developing its first Reconciliation Action Plan. By adopting an Innovate RAP, they are demonstrating readiness to develop and test innovative approaches to reconciliation and champion reconciliation at every level of the organisation.The Press Council is well placed to continue its progress across the key pillars of reconciliation—relationships, respect and opportunities.”
The Press Council’s RAP commits the organisation to:
• encouraging membership by Indigenous newspapers, magazines and online news and current affairs sites;
• engaging and consulting with Indigenous groups, individuals and organisations regarding the Press Council’s work;
• promoting employment and internship opportunities for Indigenous people at the Press Council and among member publications;
• promoting Indigenous cultural competence among staff;
• considering the impact on Indigenous peoples of current and proposed Standards of Practice;
• encouraging the Australian news media to report issues of importance for Indigenous communities in a respectful way; and
• endeavouring to promote high quality reporting in relation to Indigenous peoples.
The Australian Press Council was established in 1976 and is responsible for promoting good standards of media practice, community access to information of public interest, and freedom of expression through the media. Press Council membership encompasses over 900 mastheads, accounting for approximately 95 per cent of newspaper, magazine and online readership in Australia.
Read the Press Council’s Reconciliation Action Plan here.
Colin Hampton/Frankston Standard Leader
The Press Council has considered a complaint by Cr Colin Hampton about a front page article in the Frankston Standard Leader on 4 July 2016 headed “Councillor stoush”, which followed the release of the Councillor Conduct Panel Determination on the behaviour of the complainant and another councillor at the launch of an apartment complex in 2015.
The Council noted that the Panel dismissed all allegations against the complainant, except that his conduct in relation to two Council employees was found to be objectively threatening behaviour in breach of the Code of Conduct. It found his conduct in questioning how the other councillor came to speak was inappropriate but not in breach of the Code. The Panel found the other councillor deliberately exaggerated his evidence, and advanced nine additional allegations to assist his case without a sound factual basis, including one that the complainant was ejected from the event.
The Council accepted that the Determination was lengthy and not all aspects could be covered in the article. However, the fact the Panel disbelieved the other councillor’s evidence of his observations while speaking onstage and found he made nine additional allegations without factual basis, simply to advance his case, were very significant to presenting the report in a fair and balanced way, particularly given earlier coverage of the Panel’s formation and preparation of its report. The fact that the developer’s allegations that the complainant had made comments disparaging of the development and had tapped the developer “vigorously on the back” were not upheld was also significant, given an earlier article raised these allegations.
Accordingly, the Council considered that reasonable steps to ensure fairness and balance required the article to include these matters. It concluded that in failing to do so, the publication breached General Principle 3, and in not providing a fair opportunity for a reply after publication, it also breached General Principle 4.
The Council did not consider the reporting went so far as to be misleading, and accordingly, did not consider that it breached General Principle 1 or 2.
Osher Günsberg/Daily Mail Australia
The Press Council has considered a complaint by Osher Günsberg about an article published by Daily Mail Australia on 5 September 2016 headed “The Bachelor host Osher Gunsberg shows off his 'Bali belly’ as he goes shirtless while filming finale of reality TV show on Indonesian island”. The article referred to the complainant as “never [having] a hair out of place”, but who “revealed his portly frame and unkempt hair”. The article featured three photographs of the complainant shirtless, in at least one of which he appeared to be dressing or undressing.
The Council accepted the complainant has not exploited shirtless images of himself. The photographs were taken at a beach far away from the complainant’s filming activities on a day off and he did not see a camera taking photographs. The Council considered that while the complainant is a public figure, he has not forfeited his right to privacy altogether.
The Council considered the subject matter of the article did not relate to the complainant’s public activities. Given the fairly remote location, the care exercised by the complainant in the past to not be photographed shirtless, his lack of alternatives in the circumstances and the covert nature of the photographs, he retained a reasonable expectation of privacy which was intruded upon by the photographs and the references to “Bali belly”. There was no public interest to justify such an intrusion. Accordingly, the publication breached General Principle 5 and Privacy Principle 1.
The Council considered the complainant’s history of mental illness and weight gain are in the public domain as a result of the complainant’s own doing. But by referring to “Bali belly”, and using the photographs in the manner it did, the article ridiculed the consequences of his mental illness medication and was likely to cause substantial offence or distress. The publication failed to take reasonable steps to avoid this, and accordingly, breached General Principle 6.
The publication did not commission the photographs, which were provided unsolicited by an agency. While the complainant did not see the photographer taking the photographs, the Council was not satisfied that the photographs were gathered by deceptive or unfair means. Accordingly, the Council considered the publication did not breach General Principle 7.
Read the full adjudication
Sharon Doyle Lyons/Parramatta Advertiser
The Press Council has considered whether its Standards of Practice were breached by an article headed “Never let despair win” in the Parramatta Advertiser on 14 September 2016.
The article concerned the suicide of a 62-year-old man and was mainly based on the man’s sister’s perceptions of his response to a marriage breakdown and her support for him. It referred to her desire to raise awareness of depression and associated social stigma, that “[p]eople with depression need to keep trying to find someone who can understand them”, and that people ought realise that “[t]he carnage suicide leaves behind is wrenching…”.
The Council acknowledged the article was well-intentioned and initiated by the man’s sister, who provided informed consent. However, the publication was aware the man had two children, one an adult living with him for a period and one under 18 living with the complainant. Given the article used the man’s name and photograph, reported the regions where he lived and was found, and dealt with his possible reasons for suiciding, the effects on his family and what the sister claims might have happened had she not assisted him, the Council considered it was not sufficient to have consent only from the man’s sister. The publication should have sought consent, and invited comment from, his adult son and from the complainant as his wife (albeit estranged) and guardian of his younger son.
The Council recognised there can be substantial public benefit in suicide-related coverage, and the article highlighted some important issues. However, in the absence of such consent and invitation, the public interest did not justify using such detail. Accordingly, the Council upheld the complaint in relation to General Principles 5 and 6 in relation to privacy and avoidance of harm, and Suicide Standards 3 and 4 in relation to the reporting of individual instances of suicide.
As to Suicide Standard 7 in relation to sensitivity and moderation, the Council considered that the article was not unduly prominent or unnecessarily explicit. However, the publication should have sought to avoid hurt to the man’s sons by seeking consent and inviting comment. Accordingly, the complaint was also upheld in this respect.
Press Council awards 2017 Press Freedom Medals
The Australian Press Council has awarded its Press Freedom Medal to two outstanding individuals for their major contributions to ensuring a free and open society:
Peter Timmins - Australian Open Government Partnership Network
and
Michael Cameron - News Corp Australia.
The 2017 Press Freedom Medals were awarded at a special ceremony in Sydney on 19 May. As well as members of the Press Council, journalists and guests from a variety of organisations attended.
Peter Timmins is a well-known advocate of improved standards of transparency and accountability and Australia’s leading expert on Freedom of Information (FOI) policy and privacy, as well as being a leader of the Australian Open Government Partnership Network and publisher of the Open and Shut blog.
Michael Cameron is the National Editorial Counsel for News Corp Australia. He leads an in-house legal team, which he established, whose members have appeared in dozens of matters involving challenges to suppression orders, injunctions, defamation actions and so on, advocating for transparency and open justice.
“The purpose of the Australian Press Council is to promote responsible journalism to inform the Australian public and support effective democratic institutions. This year’s winners have been exemplary in their tireless pursuit of the critical principle that citizens have a right to know, and so governments, and other important public and private institutions, must operate in an open and transparent manner,” said Chair Professor David Weisbrot.
“Although the Press Council did not set off with this intention, this year’s Press Freedom Medal winners prove the point that free speech and press freedom are not only reliant on brave and capable editors and journalists, but also on lawyers, activists and others who fight to preserve and extend these freedoms.”
Michael Cameron said: “I’m honoured to accept this award on behalf of the editorial legal team at News Corp Australia, whose tireless work enables the publication of articles that would be otherwise be barred by our unduly secretive courts system and plaintiff-friendly defamation laws. Special thanks goes to Larina Mullins, our senior litigation counsel, who has appeared at close to 100 suppression hearings in the last three years.”
Peter Timmins said: “This is a great but unexpected honour, a tribute to the many individuals and organisations including the Press Council that believe strongly in open, transparent and accountable government and joined the network to seek to ensure the government lives up to its Open Government Partnership commitments. Pursuing reform to improve our democracy is a never-ending journey.”
The Press Council has awarded Press Freedom Medals in earlier years, but it was reserved for people affiliated with the organisation. It was decided last year to revitalise the award and open it up to people who, through their work as journalists, legal practitioners, community activists or advocates, help ensure the preservation of free speech, press freedom and open and transparent government.
In May 2016, Kate McClymont of Fairfax Media and Paul Maley of News Corp Australia received the first of the medals awarded under the new criteria, to great acclaim.
Read the award citations here.
Australian Press Council appoints its first-ever Indigenous member
The Australian Press Council’s appointment of Carla McGrath — the first Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person to join the Council — is another indication of its strong commitment to increase diversity and broaden expertise in the Council’s ranks.
Welcoming the latest appointment, Australian Press Council Chair Professor David Weisbrot said Ms McGrath “shone through the selection process as an exceptionally bright, able and articulate candidate with a strong commitment to the ideals of the Press Council and to robust corporate governance”.
Ms McGrath, who is based in Cairns, is a Torres Strait Islander woman born and raised on the Australian mainland. She has a strong record of engagement in advocacy, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues and youth affairs, through organisations such as BlakDance, Shared Path Corporation, GetUp, the National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples, the NSW Reconciliation Council, AIME and the Australian Youth Affairs Coalition.
Ms McGrath’s appointment, for a three-year period, was made by the Press Council at its regular quarterly meeting late last week.
The Australian Press Council comprises over 900 mastheads, paper and electronic, and its governing board currently has 25 members, including the independent Chair and 10 “public members” who, like Ms McGrath, represent the general community. There are 11 nominees of media organisations and the journalists’ union, the MEAA, and four independent journalist members, who are not employed by any member media organisation.
“Carla’s appointment will directly and productively assist the Council in forging the linkages with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, organisations and individuals, as we are committed to do via our recently launched Reconciliation Action Plan. But she was chosen for her outstanding personal qualities and qualifications—she was the right person for the job.”
Ms McGrath said she was excited to be contributing to the work of the Press Council in promoting good standards of media practice, community access to information of public interest, and freedom of expression through the media.
“It is clear that we are living in a swiftly changing media environment where the methods for consumption of, and interaction with, content is broadening, and one where the very definition of free speech is consistently being called into question.
“As a Torres Strait Islander woman, I feel a strong sense of responsibility to enable the diverse and unique perspectives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to be represented in conversations relating to the role and responsibilities of the press,” Ms McGrath said.
The Press Council has taken a number of steps recently to better reflect the Australian community. In April, another very impressive young leader — Zione Walker-Nthenda, a human rights lawyer with wide experience in family law, family violence and child protection issues — became the first person of African descent to join the Council. At the same time, Kirstie Parker, a Yuwallarai woman from northern NSW, was appointed as an industry adjudication panel member. Ms Parker is CEO of the National Centre for Indigenous Excellence, an elected Co-Chair of the National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples and a Director of Reconciliation Australia.
In February, the Press Council welcomed its first Indigenous publication as a member: the Koori Mail, a fortnightly newspaper with a national readership of some 100,000.
CORRECTION re Australian Press Council Media Release 25 May 2017
In a media release issued by the Press Council on 25 May 2017, headed “Australian Press Council appoints its first-ever Indigenous member”, it was stated that Carla McGrath was the first Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander person to assume the position. This is not correct.
In fact, the Press Council has had at least two Indigenous members in the past:
• Mr Colin Bourke MBE, who was a public member from 1982 to 1991; and
• Ms Natascha McNamara AM MBE, who was appointed an alternate member in 1992, and a full public member from 1997 to 2003.
The Council regrets this error and sincerely apologises to Mr Bourke and Ms McNamara.
We thank Lange Powell, the Press Council’s Vice-Chair 1998-2004, for bringing these facts to our attention and reminding us of this aspect of our own history. We also thank Mr Bourke and Ms McNamara for their services to press freedom and quality in Australia.
###Australian Press Council welcomes Dili Declaration on Press Freedom
The Australian Press Council says the historic Dili Declaration on the role of press councils in a democratic society is a significant step forward in ensuring press freedom in southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands.
The Declaration—signed by Australian Press Council Chairman Professor David Weisbrot and representatives of six other regional Press Councils on 10 May 2017—was the culmination of an international conference to mark the first anniversary of the establishment of the Timor-Leste Press Council.
Professor Weisbrot said that "press councils have a vital role in supporting the development of quality journalism and a free media, as well as promoting the safety of journalists, and enhancing media inclusion of under-represented and vulnerable groups in society.
“The Dili Declaration recognises the essential role that the free press plays in a democratic society,” Professor Weisbrot said.
"Countries like Australia and New Zealand—with a long history of press councils providing that delicate balance between encouraging robust free speech (including confronting and challenging free speech) and mechanisms to ensure good standards, fairness and accuracy of media reportage—are well placed to make a key contribution in this region.
"Press councils in Southeast Asia and the Pacific face the dual challenges of negotiating these same issues, but doing so in countries that traditionally have not enjoyed a free press. They are working from the ground up to build a framework for responsible journalism.
“It’s an ambitious and sensitive task,” Professor Weisbrot said, “but one we are willing to help with wherever possible.”
Signatories to the Dili Declaration are the press councils of Timor-Leste, Australia, Indonesia, New Zealand, Myanmar, Thailand and Papua New Guinea.
Timor-Leste Press Council Chair Virgilio da Silva Guterres described the Declaration as an historic step for the collective advocacy of press freedom and freedom of expression.
“It reflects the collective commitments to share experiences and resources among the declarators in advancing democracy in both regions and in respective countries. And we, (the Timor-Leste Press Council) are honoured to have hosted this event and become part of this Declaration.”
Professor Weisbrot said it was gratifying to see the strong support for the fledgling Timor-Leste Press Council by the Timor-Leste government, with the conference in Dili opened by the Prime Minister and closed by the President. The Timor-Leste Communications Minister was an active and engaged participant throughout the event.
“Also gratifying was the fact that at least 100 young local journalists and journalism students attended the conference—and had no hesitation in asking the tough questions of their leaders. Their energy and fearlessness provides great cause for optimism about the future of the media—and its role in further promoting democracy—in that country.”
Click here for full text of the Dili Declaration
The Australian will boycott Press Council decisions of ‘political stack’ Carla McGrath
The Australian will boycott testimony and not accept adjudications of complaints by the Australian Press Council in which its newest member, left-wing activist group GetUp’s deputy chairwoman Carla McGrath, takes part.
Ms McGrath’s role at GetUp! — an organisation that has in the past raised funds to publicly campaign against News Corp Australia publications and mock election coverage from some of the nation’s largest newspapers — has raised serious concerns among editors, who fear they will not be given a fair hearing when complaints are raised about coverage of important public-interest issues on topics such as climate change and immigration.
The Press Council appointed Ms McGrath, a social activist who specialises in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues and youth affairs, to its board last week despite protests from Press Council members that her role with GetUp! could lead to serious conflicts of interest
“The Australian will not accept any adjudication finding that the GetUp! deputy chair has participated in, as we have a reasonable apprehension of bias given the organisation’s strident political activism, including its campaigns against News Corp publications,” he said.
“It is very disappointing and deeply concerning that APC chairman Professor David Weisbrot has endorsed this appointment. The Press Council should not be a political stack.”
Liberal senator Eric Abetz last night called for the council to reconsider the appointment, saying its credibility would be “severely” undermined.
Australian Press Council Statement re Appointment of Carla McGrath
Public Members of the Australian Press Council are appointed and sit on the Council as individuals, not as representatives of any particular organisation or employer they may be associated with.
The sort of people that are likely to be appointed as Public Members will probably have been active in their professions and in their communities, so there is always the potential for a real or perceived conflict of interest to arise.
The Australian Press Council currently has 26 members, comprising
• the independent Chair and 10 “Public Members”, who have no affiliations with a media organisation;
• 11 nominees of media organisations and the MEAA, which are “constituent bodies” of the Council
• four independent journalist members, who are not employed by any of the member media organisations.
Every member of the Press Council is aware of their duties to disclose potential conflicts of interest and the Press Council has a long history of successfully — and conservatively — managing these conflicts to avoid any suggestion of bias.
In the case of Carla McGrath, Australian Press Council Chair Professor David Weisbrot specifically flagged the issue of perceived or actual conflicts of interest as a result of her multiple Board and leadership roles and her long history of community engagement and advocacy on a range of issues, including Indigenous and youth affairs.
The issue was canvassed at length at the May meeting of Council. Following that discussion, the overwhelming majority of the Council Members was satisfied that any potential conflicts of interest could be successfully managed, and Ms McGrath’s appointment was made.
In the normal course of events, a new Public Member of the Press Council would not be rostered to sit on an adjudication panel for a period of at least six to 12 months. It is not anticipated that Ms McGrath will be assigned to adjudicate complaints until early to mid-2018, and all such assignments take into account potential conflict of interest issues. It is worth noting that adjudication panels are made up of five to seven members, including the Chair or a Vice-Chair, and an even balance of Public Members and independent journalists. Publisher Members of Council do not sit on these panels.
Complainant/Daily Mail Australia
The Press Council has considered whether its Standards of Practice were breached by an article published by Daily Mail Australia on 3 January 2017, headed “Horrific moment a dog is BOILED ALIVE and Chinese villagers rip out its fur in clumps before incredibly it gets up and runs away”.
The article began: “This is the disturbing moment villagers in China filmed themselves boiling a tied-up dog in a huge pot of water.” It included a video sourced from another website in which a small dog is depicted in a large steaming wok. In the video, the dog kicked off the lid and barked in apparent agony. The lid was again placed over the dog, before it fell out into another large pan where it laid as villagers removed fur from its body. The dog regained consciousness and attempted to flee the scene to run away as the villagers laughed. The article also included four stills from the video and described the footage in detail.
The Council recognised that the level of offence and distress caused by published material can be reduced by the extent to which the reader has a real choice about whether to view it, and the nature of the warnings given prior to any decision to view the material. In this case, warnings were provided and the article itself alerted readers to the contents of the video, the full version of which only ran when clicked on.
However, the Council considered that even with the warnings and text, the video depicting the cooking of a dog while alive was substantially offensive and distressing. The warnings and text did not adequately prepare readers for this. To reduce the level of offence and distress, the publication could have for instance presented selected extracts of the video.
While the Council considered there may be a public interest in promoting awareness of China’s dog meat trade and the inhumane means used to slaughter animals, such a public interest did not justify the level of offence and distress caused by this video.
As such, the Council concluded that the publication failed to take reasonable steps to avoid causing substantial offence and distress, and without sufficient justification in the public interest. Accordingly, it breached General Principle 6.
Further statement from Australian Press Council on the Appointment of Carla McGrath
The Australian Press Council wishes to clarify some issues involving its processes and how it adjudicates complaints and handles perceived or actual conflicts of interest. These issues have arisen in the reporting and commentary on the recent appointment of Ms Carla McGrath as a public member.
Upon receipt of a complaint, Press Council staff undertake a triage process, making an initial assessment and analysis of each complaint received. The vast majority of complaints are resolved without formal adjudication, such as through a correction or agreement to publish a letter to the editor or an op-ed piece. Decisions at this stage are made by the Executive Director exercising powers conferred on him by the Council—there is no involvement of Council members. For example, in 2015-16, only six per cent of complaints (30 cases) resulted in referral to the Press Council’s Adjudication Panel for formal determination involving an Adjudication Panel.
An Adjudication Panel usually comprises the Chair (or one of the two Vice-Chairs), two public members and two independent journalists. It is important to note that publisher members never sit on Adjudication Panels.
Ms McGrath is now one of 10 public members. In any given year, a public member could expect to be asked to sit on one or two Adjudication Panels, subject to availability, and the absence of any conflicts of interest.
It is routine for the Press Council to consider any actual or perceived conflicts of interest that may arise.
For example, in recent times, the Press Council identified a perceived conflict of interest involving a Council member. A news organisation that had previously expressed concern about his appointment was the subject of a complaint; the member did not sit on this adjudication.
In another instance, a public member who had previously published an op-ed piece on an issue that involved broadly the same subject matter declared this conflict and, erring on the side of caution, stood down from consideration of that complaint.
The Press Council will apply the same rigorous principles in future to any Adjudication Panels on which Ms McGrath might be available to serve in future. That is, she will not sit if the Press Council or Ms McGrath considers there is a real or perceived conflict of interest involving the complainant or the publisher, the subject matter of the complaint, or the activities of the numerous organisations with which she is or has been associated.
As previously noted, in the normal course of events, Ms McGrath would not be asked to sit on an Adjudication Panel for at least the next 6-12 months.
Ms McGrath’s duties as public member will also require her to attend quarterly meetings of the Press Council. She is one of 26 members of the Press Council and, therefore, her voice will be one of 26 around the table. The Press Council has deliberately sought to add diversity to its membership, representing a wide range of viewpoints and backgrounds. It should go without saying that the Council does not apply any litmus test in relation to a potential member’s religious, political or other views.
The Press Council notes its previous statement that, in relation to the appointment of Ms McGrath as a public member, Australian Press Council Chair Professor David Weisbrot specifically flagged the issue of perceived or actual conflicts of interest as a result of her multiple Board and leadership roles and her long history of community engagement and advocacy on a range of issues, including Indigenous and youth affairs.
The issue was canvassed at length at the May meeting of Council. The date of the May meeting of Council was set last year. The Agenda Papers are sent to all members of Council about one week before the meeting. Any Council member not able to attend a meeting in person is able to appoint a proxy.
Following discussion at the May meeting of Council, the overwhelming majority of the Council Members were satisfied that Ms McGrath was eminently appointable and that any potential conflicts of interest would be successfully managed. The Press Council can confirm that after a full and frank discussion, the Council voted to appoint Ms McGrath by 14-1, with one abstention. The Council confirms public statements already made by representatives of Fairfax Media and the MEAA that they voted in favour of appointing Ms McGrath. We note that the MEAA has since publicly reversed the position expressed in the Council meeting. The Council confirms statements made by News Corp that its representative voted against the appointment of Ms McGrath. The Council makes no further comment on the Council vote.
Australian Press Council Statement regarding vote on Carla McGrath appointment
As stated in its media release on Tuesday 6 June, the Press Council has recorded the vote in relation to Carla McGrath’s appointment as a public member of the Council as 14-1 in favour, with 1 abstention. Mr Peter Holder of the Daily Mail Australia has since contacted the Council to indicate that he voted against the appointment and that when the draft minutes of the May meeting are considered for approval at the next meeting, he will ask that his vote be recorded as being against the appointment.
The Council, on behalf of public member Robyne Schwarz, would like to correct the report in The Australian on 7 June regarding her vote.
The Council confirms, at Robyne Schwarz’s request, that she abstained from the vote to appoint Carla McGrath as a public member of the Australian Press Council, contrary to the report in The Australian, which claimed she voted in favour.
The Council makes no further comment as to the meeting.
Another three lengthy articles in The Australian today about Carla McGrath, GetUp!, and The Australian Press Council. It is being argued that GetUp! should be regarded as a publisher as they are paying journalist Michael West a reported $100,000 per year to write stories for the GetUp! website, stories that are also published on his own website. Publishers are not allowed to have employees appointed as public members to the Press Council. It is also being alleged by the paper that APC chairman David Weisbrot has a conflict as he sat as a director on a GetUp! funded not-for-profit litigation board in 2015 while he was APC chairman.
Complainant/Daily Mail Australia
The Press Council has considered whether its Standards of Practice were breached by the publication of an article by Daily Mail Australia on 10 January 2017, headed “Transgender woman, 24, accused of bludgeoning two innocent people with an axe at 7-Eleven was born as a boy named Karl - but had a sex change two years ago in Thailand to become Evie”.
The Council was satisfied the woman’s transgender status was suggested by her request in court to be supplied with certain drugs. Also, the factual material published about the woman’s background appeared to have been obtained from her public Facebook page, and there was no suggestion it was presented inaccurately. While the Council was concerned about the many prominent references to the woman’s transgender status, it was satisfied on the material available to it that the publication took reasonable steps to report the factual material with fairness and balance. Accordingly, it did not breach General Principle 3.
In considering whether the publication took reasonable steps to avoid causing or contributing materially to substantial offence, distress, prejudice or a risk to health or safety, the Council considered it appropriate to take into account the nature of the alleged crime as reported, that the woman had requested transgender-related and anti-depressant drugs, and that the personal background material was made publicly available by the woman on Facebook. While the Council was concerned about the extensive material in the article about her transgender status, given the nature of the alleged crime and information about the drugs being taken by the woman, the publication did not breach General Principle 6 in this respect. Notwithstanding this, the Council noted that the Australian community may be at an early stage of understanding the appropriate approach to reporting transgender issues, and there is a need for caution and sensitivity in reporting on such matters.
The publication also included photographs of and the full name of the woman’s partner, as well as some of her personal Facebook comments. It named the woman’s sister and included photographs of her as well as their mother and an unidentified man with them. It was not necessary to include this level of detail and in any case, the faces of the woman’s friends and family could have been pixilated in the photographs. The Council concluded that there was no sufficient public interest justifying this level of detail. Accordingly, the publication breached General Principle 6 in this respect, having failed to take reasonable steps to avoid causing or contributing materially to substantial offence, distress or prejudice, or risk to health or safety. For the same reasons, the publication also breached Privacy Principle 7.
###Professor David Weisbrot reigns as Chair of the Australian Press Council
Reason for leaving was “persistent personal attacks” and a campaign of “misinformation” over the Council’s appointment of public member Carla McGrath
The Vice-Chairs of the Australian Press Council have expressed their “deep regret” at the decision made today by Professor David Weisbrot AM to resign as Chair of the organisation, effective 18 July.
The Hon John Doyle AC and Ms Julie Kinross praised Professor Weisbrot for his outstanding contribution to the Press Council over the past two and a half years, saying the Council “will be the poorer for the loss of his leadership”.
The Vice-Chairs said they had made concerted efforts to convince Professor Weisbrot to stay.
In his letter of resignation, Professor Weisbrot said the reason for leaving was “persistent personal attacks” and a campaign of “misinformation” over the Council’s appointment of public member Carla McGrath, made after a “fair and open process” and a convincing vote by the full Council.
Professor Weisbrot said “my heart is simply no longer in the job, and it’s a difficult enough job at the best of times.”
Professor Weisbrot stated: “For the record, the basis of these attacks is thoroughly misconceived, suggesting that the appointment of a public member to the Council is within the gift of the Chair, and that I have the authority unilaterally to ‘rescind’ that appointment. In fact, the whole appointment process was carried out with careful attention to good process and the requirements set down by the Council’s Constitution.”
Professor Weisbrot expressed his “profound appreciation” to the Press Council’s Executive Director John Pender and the secretariat, the current and previous Vice-Chairs and members of the Press Council.
The Vice-Chairs of the Press Council acknowledge the outstanding work of Professor Weisbrot. Some of the highlights of his tenure include:
- re-energising the Council’s role as a strong public advocate for free speech, press freedom and open and transparent government;
- revamping and refreshing the Council’s Press Freedom Medal awards, to make them more outward looking and relevant to the industry and the community;
- the development of the Council’s first-ever Strategic Plan and first-ever Reconciliation Action Plan;
- increasing membership, including, for the first time, membership by Indigenous and multicultural publications, as well as from new online-only publications, such as Daily Mail Australia, Huffington Post, and Schwartz Media;
- developing a new and much needed Advisory Guideline on Reporting Family Violence;
- increasing collaboration with journalism schools to support education and training, especially in media ethics;
- increasing collaboration and information sharing with other press councils in our region and internationally; and
- organising an outstanding international conference on press freedom to help mark the Council’s 40th anniversary.
Complainant/Northern District Times
The Press Council has considered a complaint about an article in the real estate magazine of the Northern District Times on 23 November 2016, headed “Building’s high energy surrounds are too good to ignore” in print with a similar headline online. It gave the names and ages of the complainant and her partner, stating that they “bought a north facing studio apartment” in a property development, and provided details of it.
On the information available, the Council accepted the complainant’s statement that she is the sole owner of the apartment, and the suggestion that she and her partner were joint purchasers was not correct. However, as the publication relied on information provided by the developer’s public relations company, the Council considered it reasonable for the publication to expect it to know who the purchaser was. The Council also considered it reasonable for the publication to rely on the manner in which the complainant’s partner discussed the purchase (using the pronoun “we”) and that he never stated he was not a purchaser. Accordingly, the Council considered the publication took reasonable steps to ensure accuracy and General Principle 1 was not breached.
In relation to remedial action, as the complainant’s partner had some practical involvement in the purchase and acted as if he was a purchaser, the Council was not satisfied the inaccuracy was significant. In any event, the publication took steps to remove the article and its traces from its associated channels. Accordingly, General Principle 2 was not breached.
The Council noted that neither the publication nor the complainant provided direct information as to whether consent to publish the information about the complainant and the purchase was requested. The Council was not able to reject the publication’s claim that it reasonably believed the complainant was content for the material to be published. The Council noted the information published about the complainant as purchaser of the apartment is publicly available. Accordingly, the Council concluded that the publication took reasonable steps to avoid intruding on the complainant’s reasonable expectations of privacy, and General Principle 5 was not breached.
Complainant/The Advertiser
The Press Council has considered whether its Standards of Practice were breached by an article in The Advertiser on 17 March 2017, headed “BLOWING HIS FUSE: Sparks fly as Premier ambushes minister but exclusive polls reveal SA blames Jay for power crisis” on page one in print, and “As Jay Weatherill confronts Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg, poll shows he’s to blame for SA’s power crisis” online.
The article contained a table setting out details and results of a poll, including the question asked of respondents (“In your opinion, who is mostly to blame for South Australia’s high power prices and blackouts?”) and the responses (“The Weatherill Government”, 39 percent; “The National Energy Market Operator/AEMO”, 35; “Uncommitted”, 16; and “The Turnbull Government”, 10).
The Council considered the statement “polls reveal SA blames Jay for power crisis” implied as a fact that the poll established that South Australians in general blamed the Premier for the crisis. However, the polling was a sample of only three electorates, and that this polling size and distribution—even involving key marginal seats—cannot be said to reflect the opinion of the entire state.
The Council also noted that the first paragraph of the article reported that the poll “show[s] voters in key marginal seats believe he [Mr Weatherill] is most likely to blame”, despite only 39 percent of those sample considering the Weatherill Government responsible.
While the article subsequently made clear the true position, this was not done in a manner sufficient to redress the inaccuracy and misleading nature of the headline and first paragraph. Accordingly, the Council considered that the publication failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the headline and first paragraph were accurate and not misleading, which breached General Principle 1. Further, the Council did not consider the offer to publish a letter sufficient to remedy the inaccuracy, which warranted a correction. Accordingly, the publication breached General Principle 2.
Given the inclusion of other material in the article such as the poll question, results, and methodology, and the publication’s subsequent offer to publish a letter to the editor, the Council does not consider the publication failed to take reasonable steps to ensure fairness and balance. Accordingly, it did not breach General Principles 3 or 4.