Annual Report 2017–2018

Annual Report 2017–2018

ANNUAL REPORT NO 42 Year ending 30 June 2018

The Australian Press Council Level 6, 53 Berry Street North 2060 02 9261 1930 1800 025 712 [email protected] www.presscouncil.org.au

ISSN: 0156-1308

Design: SavvyGraphics.com.au Photography: Rick Stevens, Michael Rose, AAP The Press Council is responsible for promoting good standards of media practice, community access to information of public interest and freedom of expression through the media. It also sets standards and responds to complaints about material in Australian and magazines, as well as a growing number of online-only publications. Contents

Foreword from the Chair 5 Executive Director’s Report 7 Key Numbers for the Year 8 The Year in Review 11 Complaints Handling 14 Case Studies 16 Complaints and Complainants 20 Council Membership and Staff 22 Finances 25 Member Publications 29 Summaries of Adjudications 37 Full Adjudications 39 4 The months immediately prior to my taking on the role of Chair were exceptionally challenging ones for the Press Foreword Council, in light of the unexpected resignation of my predecessor, Professor David Weisbrot. I would like to pay tribute to the Vice-Chairs for having from the Chair steered the Council through this difficult time. It also placed increased pressure on the Executive Director and the staff and, again, I would like to recognise their work 2017–2018 was far from an easy year during this period. An early priority was to ensure that the Council was for the Press Council, but, in my view, independent and seen to be independent. The subsequent the Council is well placed to continue decisions and actions in this regard are outlined elsewhere in this Annual Report. its important work and to respond to My other early priority was to meet with Council members emerging challenges. and publishers to help me to get across the many issues facing the organisation and media industry. I made clear in those meetings, and at every other opportunity in recent months, that my aim as Chair is to ensure that the Press Council is a respected and independent self-regulatory body, which has the confidence of publishers and the community, contributes to a strong and free press – particularly in this digital world – and values and promotes quality journalism. To that end, I saw it as extremely important, for example, that the Press Council prepare a thorough and thoughtful submission to the ACCC Inquiry into the impact of digital platforms on the supply of news and journalistic content and the implications of this for media content creators, advertisers and consumers. Similarly, we made a submission to the South Australian government on its proposals to amend shield laws to protect journalists in that State. I have also made it clear that the Press Council must continue to refine, improve and speed up its complaints handling and standards-setting processes, to make them ever more relevant and responsive to journalists and citizens in a time of rapid change. The Press Council must have efficient and effective standards of practice and complaints handling that take into account the realities of the digital age. 2017–2018 was far from an easy year for the Press Council, but, in my view, the Council is well placed to continue its important work and to respond to emerging challenges. Neville Stevens AO

5 6 Executive Director’s Report

Although the news industry continued to of the community to gain a valuable shared awareness of the complex issues that can arise in the day-to-day undergo significant change during the year, practice of media reporting. the Press Council’s work of promoting Advocating for press freedom, free speech and responsible journalism – the third strategic goal – has freedom of speech and responsible also never been more important. Without these our journalism continued. society will be less able to address its problems. The Vice-Chairs of the Council, the Hon John Doyle AC and Julie Kinross, who were appointed Acting Chairs following the resignation of the former Chair Professor David Weisbrot in mid-2017, led the Press Council’s Given the ease with which disinformation and work for the first half of the year. In addition to leading misinformation can spread, the Press Council, and the broad work on the strategic goals, they steered efforts responsible journalism to which its publisher members to improve the Council’s corporate governance through aspire, has never been more important. development of the Conflict of Interest Policy and the Public Member Policy, which encapsulated practices The Council’s strategic goal of ensuring effective around potential conflicts and the important role of complaints handling is important for publishers, public members. They also furthered a process of the community and other stakeholders. While the constitutional review, which had been initiated due to complaints-handling process is undoubtedly valuable legislative changes, and successfully led the process for to publishers by promoting reader trust and loyalty, recruiting a new Chair. it is no small thing that in times when the industry is undergoing substantial change the publishers have On 20 January 2018 the Secretariat welcomed Neville continued their financial support of the Council and Stevens AO to the role of Chair. It is entirely appropriate continue to cooperate as quickly as possible with its that one of his first achievements was finalisation of processes. Importantly, sometimes the arguments reform of the Constitution and the comprehensive raised during the complaints-handling process mirror review of potential conflicts of interest. debates within society, something which no complaints- I would like to express my deep appreciation to the Vice- handling process can resolve. Chairs and the Chair for their enormous contribution Another strategic goal – developing and refining and thank all Council and Adjudication Panel members standards, guidelines and industry education – is for their effective work. Most of all, I would like to also important in an age where disinformation and express my appreciation to Secretariat staff past and misinformation can be readily spread. Standards present for their outstanding work during a challenging establish a balance for Press Council members between period. It has been a privilege to work collaboratively valuable but contradictory factors such as perfect with every one of them. accuracy and delivering news in a timely way, or an John Pender individual’s expectation of privacy and the benefits of certain information to the broader community. The Press Council’s Advisory Guidelines can provide an opportunity for journalists, publishers and members

7 959COMPLAINANTS IN 2017–2018 “My objective is to ensure that the Press Council is a respected and independent self-regulatory body, which has the confidence of publishers and the community, contributes to a strong and free press and promotes quality journalism.”

PRESS COUNCIL CHAIR / NEVILLE STEVENS

8 COMPLAINTS FORMAL ADJUDICATIONS 554 30 83% 10 COMPLAINTS UPHELD OR PARTIALLY STAFF WORKING AT THE 959 UPHELD BY THE ADJUDICATION PANEL COUNCIL SECRETARIAT

9 10 Guideline on Reporting Elections, which was finalised in the following year. There are a number of other areas where The Year work in updating or developing Advisory Guidelines would have been valuable and the Council will progress those projects in the period ahead. in Review During the year the federal government established a Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund, which allows publishing companies with an annual turnover of less than $30 million to apply for grants of up to $1 million. The Press Council made some submissions in relation to the grants and provided support in other ways. The Key Australian Press Council activities Australian Communications and Media Authority, which is The purpose of the Press Council is to promote freedom of responsible for administering the grants program, asked speech and responsible journalism and, as identified in its the Press Council to nominate a representative to sit on an Strategic Plan 2016-2020, it does so by: Advisory Panel and independent journalist member Anna • ensuring effective complaints handling Reynolds was nominated to do so. • developing and refining standards, guidelines and Significantly, one of the criteria for applying for a grant is industry education; and that the publication in question must be a member of the • advocating for press freedom, free speech and Press Council or demonstrate that it has a similarly robust responsible journalism. complaints-handling system. At least partly as a result of The 2017–2018 reporting year was one of transition for this, inquiries from smaller publications about joining the the Press Council. The Vice-Chairs, the Hon John Doyle Press Council began to increase significantly during the and Julie Kinross, acted as Chairs of the Council until 20 reporting period. January 2018, when the appointment of Neville Stevens as Once again the Press Council awarded prizes to Chair took effect. outstanding students in partnership with the Journalism Education and Research Association of (JERAA). Ensure effective complaints handling These are part of an existing program, known as the Ossie The Press Council continued to respond in accordance Awards, organised by JERAA to recognise outstanding with its process to complaints about material in Australian achievement by students in university journalism schools newspapers and magazines, as well as a growing number in Australia, New Zealand and Fiji. This year, more than of online-only publications. There were 554 complaints 170 entries were submitted to the Ossie awards across 18 in 2017–2018 from 959 complainants. A discussion of categories, with 21 universities in Australia, New Zealand the complaints process, case studies of a number of and Fiji eligible to take part. complaints, and detailed complaint statistics for the year The winner of the Australian Press Council 2017 Prize for are set out in other sections of this Annual Report. Journalism Student of the Year was Rochelle Kirkham The Council completed a project to improve efficiency of its of RMIT University. This prize is for a student who has complaints-handling software during the year, but deferred performed well in all academic subjects and who has commencement of a larger software enhancement project. also produced outstanding journalism as part of their coursework or freelance articles. Develop and refine standards, guidelines A number of media and journalism events were attended and industry education during the year. A unique and valuable conference for school-aged children called Media Me was convened by Three of the Press Council’s Advisory Guidelines were Crinkling News, a for children published by a updated in the reporting period; one concerning reporting member of the Press Council. The Executive Director and on opinion polls and two others regarding publication the Director of Strategic Issues observed children learning of readers’ letters to the editor and digital alteration of about media literacy in the digital era. images. Extensive work was done on revising the Advisory

11 Advocate for press freedom, free speech and responsible journalism The Press Council made a submission to the Digital Platforms Inquiry undertaken by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). The Press Council’s submission noted, among other things, the profound impact on public interest journalism of the technological and other changes faced by the media industry in Australia and overseas. The Council stated in its submission that a major issue in Journalists at work in Budget lock-up this transformation has been the growing power of digital platforms such as Facebook and Google to influence a Key organisational enablers number of extremely important elements in the news media industry, including newsgathering, subject matter The Press Council continued to develop the key and techniques, as well as the format, presentation and organisational enablers identified in its Strategic Plan: distribution of news content. • managing relationships well with members and Following receipt of that submission, the Executive external stakeholders Director, the Director of Strategic Issues and the Acting • supporting and growing the membership base Director of Research and Communications attended a • developing skills and capabilities meeting with the ACCC on 25 June 2018 to further discuss • refining governance structures, and issues raised in the document. • ensuring ongoing financial sustainability. The Press Council also made a submission to the South The Press Council’s Conflict of Interest policy was reviewed Australian government about its proposed journalist shield and updated, given the importance of Council members law provisions. reflecting the community, being independent and being seen as independent. A new Conflict of Interest Policy and Senior staff attended meetings with other key stakeholders a Public Member Policy were approved in December 2017. during the year, including the Executive Director and the Director of Research and Communications who visited the A significant amount of work was undertaken to review Australian headquarters of Facebook and Google, which the Press Council’s Constitution – the foundational legal provided insights into their operations. Discussions with a document setting out, among other things, the objectives, range of media stakeholders provided insights into so- powers and procedures of the Association and the Council, called “fake news” and public-interest journalism. and the rights and obligations of publisher members. The review of the Constitution was instigated by amendments The Press Council continued to award its annual Press to the Associations Incorporation Act 2009 (NSW), which Freedom medal, a prize that generates much community set a number of default provisions that were ill-fitted to the and media interest. The 2018 winners were Peter Greste, Press Council’s circumstances. one of Australia’s most respected and experienced foreign correspondents, a vocal proponent of press freedom and In May 2018, the Press Council adopted a new form of now Professor of Journalism and Communications at the Constitution with a number of provisions, which were more University of Queensland, and Gerard Ryle, Director of the appropriate for the Council than the default provisions, to International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, a improve the governance structure of the Association and network of more than 200 journalists and 100 global media the Council. The new Constitution was registered in May organisations collaborating on major investigative stories. 2018 and is available on the Press Council’s website. The awards were made at a World Press Freedom Day The Council at its quarterly meeting in Sydney on 11 May event hosted at Twitter’s Sydney offices on 3 May 2018. 2018 carefully examined formal declarations of interest by all of its members as to any potential conflicts of interest. As a result of that process, one member, Carla McGrath,

12 was asked to resign because the Council regarded her position as Deputy Chair of the Board of GetUp! as incompatible with her continued role as a public member of the Council. Carla McGrath was removed as a member of Council on 31 August 2018. Online-only publications InDaily, based in , joined the Council in December 2017 and Women’s Agenda, based in Melbourne, joined in January 2018. During the year the Press Council continued to pursue goals established under its Reconciliation Action Plan. The Council also joined the Media Reconciliation Industry Network Group (Media RING), which brings together many of Australia’s major media organisations with the shared purpose of developing and enhancing career opportunities Press Freedom Medal Winner Peter Greste for Indigenous Australians in the media. During the year the Secretariat was also engaged in finding more suitable premises. A lease agreement was negotiated for office space in 53 Berry St, North Sydney and the Secretariat moved into the new premises from 1 July 2018. Chair’s keynote address to the Melbourne Press Club In a keynote speech to the Melbourne Press Club in April 2018, the Chair, Neville Stevens, outlined some of the major challenges, and his own priorities, for the Press Council. Chair Neville Stevens at the Melbourne Press Club “The Internet and the digital world have changed publishing forever,” he said. “They have also changed and will continue to change the operations of the Press Council. One of the challenges for the Press Council is to reconcile these changes with its core function of promoting and upholding standards crucial to public trust in media… “We need to be talking together about such things as the need for ever-more rigorous checking of facts by journalists, not always an easy thing with fake news and a potentially heavy new cost when publishers are struggling to remain profitable. We need to talk about the need for greater media literacy among information consumers… “My objective is to ensure that the Australian Press Council is a respected and independent self-regulatory body, which has the confidence of the community and publishers, which contributes to a strong and free press and which values and promotes quality journalism.” Council members Sean Aylmer, John Bedwell, Paul Merrill, Zione Walker-Nthenda

13 Complaints Handling

The Press Council members enter a binding Where a complainant is not identified or directly affected they are regarded as a ‘secondary complainant’ and usually agreement to comply with its Standards of cease to have a direct role in the process after lodging the Practice and its complaints process. complaint. The Executive Director decides which issues are to be considered by the Council as a result of secondary Complaints about material published by Press Council complaints. He or she does so after considering the members are submitted using the form on the Press complaints themselves and also any other possible Councils website or by post for people without Internet breaches of the Council’s Standards of Practice that access. may arise from the material or action in question. The issues will not necessarily include, or be strictly limited Details of the complaints are entered into the Press to, those which are raised explicitly by the complainant. Council’s complaint management system (CMS). The If a complaint is to be considered further, a Provisional implementation of the CMS in June 2016 has enabled the Summary of Issues document is used to clarify the issues. Press Council to more efficiently maintain its complaint This provides a focus for the Press Council’s assessment files. A number of improvements were made to the CMS of whether an article complained about complies with the during 2018. Standards of Practice. The Press Council’s complaints team reviews all The Executive Director discontinues the complaint if complaints in detail and meets regularly to discuss them it is considered unlikely that a breach of the Council’s and make recommendations to the Executive Director Standards of Practice has occurred. Sometimes a for further action. This may include obtaining further complainant will withdraw a complaint or cease to respond information from the complainant or a response from the to communication from the Council about it, in which case publication, contacting the subject of the article (where it will be discontinued. Complaints may also be dealt with that person is not the complainant) or exploring with the by the Executive Director issuing a letter of advice to the complainant and publication a possible resolution, such as publication and discontinuing the complaint, or by referring a correction, an amendment, an apology or publication of the complaint to an Adjudication Panel. a letter to the editor. Adjudication Panels are made up of five to seven people. Some complaints can be eliminated at the outset as out- They are chaired by the Press Council’s Chair, or one of the of-scope if they do not fall within the Press Council’s area; Vice-Chairs or a designated Council member. They have for example complaints about television or radio content. equal numbers of public and industry members. Publisher Other complaints may be declined early in the process. members of the Council do not take part in an Adjudication If the complaint is not declined or resolved, it will be Panel. investigated further. The Final Adjudication is published by the publication as Where a complainant has been identified or is directly requested by the Executive Director, and also published on affected by an article, they are regarded as a ‘primary the Press Council’s website. complainant’ and have a role throughout the process.

14 Director of Complaints Paul Nangle Executive Director John Pender

TOTAL NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS, COMPLAINANTS AND ISSUES 2017–2018 2016-17 2015-16 2014-15 2013-14 New in-scope complaints received during year 554 582 500 525 467 Complainants making these complaints 959 1387 801 3742 849 Out-of-scope complaints received during the year 158 120 167 287 78

The Press Council has no power to order compensation, fines or other financial sanctions. Where a complaint is upheld, the Adjudication may include a reprimand or censure, and may explicitly call for (but not require) apologies, retractions, corrections or other specified remedial action by the publisher. The Adjudication may also call for specific measures to prevent recurrence of the type of breach in question. Of the 554 complaints received last year, 30 were considered by an Adjudication Panel. Just over 80 per cent of those were upheld or partially upheld.

Complaints and Governance Officer Alice Beasley with Complaints Officer Tanith Chippendale

15 Michelle Box/ (July 2017) Case Studies The Press Council considered a complaint about an article headed “The mysterious and ‘horrible’ death of Sabrina Bremer” in The Northern Star online on 18 August 2016. The article concerned a murder victim who had been These examples, along with the reported missing and whose burned body was found on the side of a road in a remote area of northern NSW. The full texts of the Press Council’s article was updated to report that: “It’s understood the woman was tied up to the tree when set alight and, as she adjudications during the year, decomposed and the rope broke, her body rolled down illustrate the breadth of complaints the roadside embankment.” Later, the article was again updated to identify the woman by name, age and place of and issues considered by Adjudication residence. Panels and how the Press Council’s The complainant, a family member of the victim, said reporting what was claimed to have happened to the Standards of Practice are applied in victim caused the family serious distress and that police particular situations. had later indicated the reporting was incorrect. The publication said the article was written by a journalist from a related publication and published there before it was republished on the publication’s own website without editorial checking. It said that an updated version failed to appear on its own website due to a technical error. The publication apologised to the complainant and said that during the Council’s complaints process the residents’ claims were removed from online and the reporter in question counselled. The Council concluded that in reporting as fact the unverified claims by residents, which later proved false, the publication had failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the article was accurate and not misleading and also failed to remedy the inaccuracy with appropriate promptness. The Council considered that in reporting the death in significant detail the publication failed to take reasonable steps to avoid causing substantial distress, particularly to the family. The Council upheld the complaint and the publication published the adjudication in print and online on 27 July 2017.

16 “Thank you heaps for your action in this. I appreciate it a lot.” Hannah Braithwaite

Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Association of Complainant/news.com.au (February 2018) Australasia/Daily Telegraph (December 2017) The Press Council considered a complaint that an article that included material about Islamic State’s “step-by-step The Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Association of guide on how to murder…” caused a risk to public safety. Australasia complained that an article by The Daily Telegraph, which included statistics about people attracted The article reported that “the latest edition of the terror to the same sex among other statistics relating to poor group’s English-language propaganda magazine… health, was misleading and offensive. The complainant encourages would-be terrorists to advertise products on said the headline “FAT CHANCE OF BEING HEALTHY” and second-hand selling sites…to lure victims and assassinate a subheading “Young Aussies have only themselves to them”. blame”, followed by the statistic about same-sex attraction The publication said the article was published with the as well as statistics relating to matters such as obesity and intent of providing readers with an insight into how IS drug use, suggested same-sex attraction is unhealthy and operates and the intention was to discourage terrorism warrants blame. and support for IS. The publication also removed the article The publication said the article did not link the issue of after being informed by a federal government department sexual identity to ill health. The headline, which focused on that the Classification Board had designated the material diet and obesity, was not intended to refer to the non-diet “Refused Classification”. issues in the graphic and should be read along with the The Press Council considered that the article did publish article. Additionally, in response to criticism from the public, verbatim much of the source material from IS, with limited the publication issued a statement on social media, which accompanying analysis or context. The Council accepted said that the article was not intended to suggest that same- there was no intention to encourage or support terrorism, sex relationships are unhealthy. but considered that republishing content from terrorist The Council considered that there is a significant entities in this manner could perpetuate the purpose difference between reporting on same-sex attraction as a of such propaganda and give publicity to its ideas and demographic factor which may affect young people’s mental practices. health as referred to in the NSW youth health framework However, the Council accepted the public interest and reporting it as a lifestyle-related health factor such in alerting readers to potential risks to their safety. as poor diet and drug use. The Council concluded that It considered that, on balance, the public interest in the headline and the sub headline associated students alerting readers to the dangerous content of the terrorist reporting same sex attraction with people affected by propaganda and its instructional detail outweighed the unhealthy lifestyle factors. risk to their safety posed by the effective republication of The Council noted the publication’s online response to terrorist propaganda. Given this risk, the Council concluded complaints from the public. However, this public statement that the public interest justified publication of the article. was not published in print and did not acknowledge The Council did not uphold the complaint, but noted that or apologise for the misleading nature of the graphic, great care needs to be exercised by publications when but rather attributed the impression to readers having reporting on terrorist propaganda to ensure that public misconstrued the article. The response did not constitute safety is not compromised. In particular, effectively adequate remedial action. republishing source material comprising instructional The Council concluded that the article was misleading and detail in how to carry out particular terrorist acts could caused substantial offence, distress, prejudice and risk to pose a risk to public safety and reasonable steps should be public health and safety, and there was no public interest taken to prevent such an outcome. justifying this. The publication published the adjudication in print and The Council upheld the complaint. The publication online on 28 February 2018. published the adjudication in print and online on 20 December 2017.

17 “Thank you immensely for your support regarding this matter. The family are very Victoria Police / The Sunday Age (November 2017) much relieved that this Victoria Police complained that an article reporting on a man being questioned by two officers about a theft was can be put to rest.” inaccurate. Joshua Lacey The article, written in the first person, described the writer’s experience being questioned by two police officers at a bus stop. The complainant said the writer’s assertions in the article were found to be false by the Victoria Police Professional Standards Command and the publication was informed. The writer was later found guilty by the “I wish to pass on Magistrates’ Court of Victoria of making a false report to police. The complainant asked the publication on a our thanks to the number of occasions over a lengthy period of time to publish a correction but no correction was made. Press Council for this The publication said it accepted the article from the writer in good faith because it had a four-decade long outcome, which is association with him and he had published a book on the police force. It said that it had refrained from publishing the article until after a formal statement by the writer was a great success for lodged with the police. The publication later published an article referring to the writer’s account of events suicide prevention in as published in the original item, the complainant’s immediate denial, and the Court’s findings regarding the Australia.” conduct of the officers. The Council considered that the serious nature of the Sara Bartlett, Mindframe Project Lead article’s allegations required the publication to take more steps before publication to verify the writer’s account. The publication’s reliance on its relationship with the writer and his filing of a formal complaint to police did not amount to reasonable steps to ensure the article’s “We appreciate the account of events was accurate and not misleading. The publication’s report on the writer’s conviction, which Council’s thorough did not identify or acknowledge the inaccuracies in the original article, did not constitute adequate remedial consideration and action. The Council encouraged the publication to publish a welcome the final correction and apology, and upheld the complaint. The publication published the adjudication in print and online on 5 November 2017. adjudication outcome.” Scott Anderson, Department of Human Services

18 Some alternative remedies

Complainant / The complainant expressed concern that an article about the closure of a restaurant was offensive in referring to a family as “Indian-born” when it was not relevant to the subject matter. In response to the complaint, the publication informed the Council that the references to the family were intended to do nothing more than provide some biographical details on the new owners of the restaurant. Press Council staff asked the publication to consider removing the article’s reference to the family’s being “Indian-born”, which it did. The Executive Director considered the removal of this reference to be a sufficient remedy in the matter. Complainant / Daily Mail Australia The complainant, a close personal friend of a deceased person and of his widowed spouse, complained about a photograph showing where her friend had died and with what was described as a red ‘blood splatter’ graphic showing where the accident occurred. She also said that the “unfortunate positioning of the inaccurate ‘absolutely shattered’ quote also verges on a morbidly inappropriate pun”. In response to the complaint, the publication said the graphic was not intended to represent blood splatter but to demonstrate the area where the person had fallen in Complainant / The Gladstone Observer order to give context for readers. It said that upon receiving The complainant expressed concern that an article was the initial complaint and reviewing the picture, it could unfair and caused distress when it reported on a court appreciate how this could be misinterpreted and removed proceeding of a woman without referring to the fact that the photograph with the graphic from the article. she had disabilities and mental health issues that impaired The complainant was satisfied with the publication’s her decision-making. The complainant, a carer for the response to the complaint. woman, said this information was made public in the courtroom where the reporter was present. In response, the publication informed the Council that it had a new editor who discussed the matter with the journalist and agreed to change the way they approached court reporting in order to ensure fairness and balance. The publication removed the article and offered to meet with the complainant and the woman who was the subject of the article to offer an apology. This offer was accepted by the complainant.

19 Complaints and Complainants

Complaints received Complaints closed New in-scope In-scope complaints complaints received 518 during the year Complainants 554 1030 Out-of-scope Out-of-scope complaints received complaints during the year 158 151 Issues raised in Complainants making complaints these complaints 959 998

20 TYPE OF PLATFORM

Online-only 354 Online and social media 9 Print 116 Print and online 178 Print, online and social media 4 COMPLAINANTS Social media 4

Individuals 627 Unspecified 4 Associations, companies and other 16 Total (in-scope and out-of-scope) 669 non-government bodies Government and other public bodies 7 OUTCOMES OF COMPLAINTS Politicians, councillors, electoral candidates 4 and political parties Declined by the Council at initial stage 275 Other 15 Discontinued 76 Total (in-scope and out-of-scope) 669 Discontinued with Letter-of-Advice 7 Withdrawn 15 COMPLAINANT LOCATION Remedy without adjudication 66 Not pursued by complainant 49 NSW 235 Adjudication – 25 VIC 175 complaint fully or partially upheld QLD 113 Adjudication – not upheld 5 WA 50 Out-of-scope 151 SA 41 Total 669 TAS 13 ACT 11 REMEDIES WITHOUT ADJUDICATION NT 8 Apology (public or private) 5 Overseas 8 Retraction, correction or clarification published 5 Unspecified 15 Material deleted entirely 9 Total (in-scope and out-of-scope) 669 Follow-up article published 2 Amendment to article 42 PUBLICATIONS Other private action/explanation 1 Newspapers and their digital platforms Other published action 2 National 58 Total 66 State 282 Regional and rural 97 ISSUES RAISED Suburban 7 Accuracy/misleading 298 Magazines and their digital platforms 10 Corrective action 60 Online-only publications 193 Fairness and balance 192 Other 22 Publication of a reply 41 Total (in-scope and out-of-scope) 669 Intrusion on privacy 94 Offence/prejudice/distress 278 Unfair or deceptive means 18 Conflict of Interest 17 Total 998

21 Council Membership Vice-Chair John Doyle Vice-Chair Julie Kinross Professor David Weisbrot AM resigned as Chair on 18 July 2017. The Vice-Chairs, the Hon John Doyle AC and Julie and Staff Kinross, acted as Chairs from then until 22 January 2018 when Neville Stevens AO took up his appointment. The Council welcomed a number of new constituent members. Andrew Porter, the Chief Operating Officer for The governing body of the Press Council Australian Metro Publishing, was appointed to the Council on 11 November 2017, replacing Sean Aylmer who resigned comprises the independent Chair; as the constituent member nominated by Fairfax Media on public members who have no affiliation 25 October 2017; Simon King, Network Editor of nine.com.au was appointed on 27 July 2017; and Amity St with a media organisation; constituent Claire joined as Bauer Media nominee on 27 July 2017 and was replaced in turn by Paul Merrill, then Editor-in-Chief members nominated by publishers of Real Life Titles, who was appointed on 25 August 2017. newspapers, magazines and online The Council farewelled Anita Quigley, the representative for media, as well as by the principal union Community Newspapers Australia, on 4 August 2017 as well as independent journalist members Peter Kerr on 27 March for employees in the media industry; 2018 and Simon Mann on 28 February 2018. The Council and independent journalist members. and Secretariat thank them for their valuable contribution. There were also a number of reappointments to the Council. The Hon John Doyle AC was reappointed as Vice-Chair on 5 October 2017. There were reappointments as public members of John Bedwell on 1 July 2017, Jennifer Elliott on 22 May 2018, Dr Felicity-ann Lewis on 28 August 2017 and Robyne Schwarz AM on 1 December 2017. Tony Gillies, AAP Editor-in-Chief, was reappointed as a constituent member on 13 June 2018 and Anna Reynolds was reappointed as an independent journalist member on 1 December 2017.

CONSTITUENT BODIES OF THE PRESS COUNCIL The constituent bodies are the publishers and other organisations in the media industry that have agreed to abide by the Australian Press Council’s Constitution, provide funding, cooperate with the Council’s handling of complaints against them and publish any resultant adjudications. InDaily, a digital-only publication based in South Australia and Women’s Agenda, a digital-only publication based in Victoria joined the Press Council as constituent bodies in Chair Neville Stevens AO December 2017 and February 2018, respectively.

22 PRESS COUNCIL SUB-COMMITTEES COUNCIL MEMBERS AT 30 JUNE 2018 The Press Council has an Adjudication Panel (Complaints Neville Stevens AO Chair Sub-Committee), a Constituent Funding Sub-Committee Hon John Doyle AC Vice-Chair and an Administration and Finance Sub-Committee. Julie Kinross Vice-Chair

The Adjudication Panel considers and decides complaints John Bedwell Public Member referred to it for adjudication by the Executive Director. It Jennifer Elliot Public Member usually comprises the Chair, a Vice-Chair or an appointed Dr Felicity-ann Lewis Public Member Panel Chair, three public members and three constituent Dr Suzanne Martin Public Member members. Carla McGrath Public Member The Constituent Funding Sub-Committee determines Andrew Podger AO Public Member the overall level of funding for the Press Council and the Robyne Schwarz AM Public Member contributions to be made by each constituent body. It Zione Walker-Nthenda Public Member comprises the Chair, Vice-Chairs and one nominee of each constituent body. Anna Reynolds Independent Journalist Member Mike Steketee Independent Journalist Member The Administration and Finance Sub-Committee oversees administration and finances for the Press Council. It Tony Gillies AAP comprises the Chair and at least two other public members, Chris Graham Smaller publishers’ representative two publisher members and either one journalist member Peter Holder Daily Mail Australia or the Council member nominated by the MEAA. Simon King nine.com.au SECRETARIAT Paul Merrill Bauer Media Group Andrew Porter Fairfax Media There were also a number of changes in Secretariat staffing during the year. Shamim Islam resigned as Office Manager Matthew Ricketson MEAA and Rosemarie Ryan acted in that role on a temporary basis Glenn Stanaway Australia until Joelle Patten was appointed Office Manager in January Bob Yeates Country Press Australia 2018. The Secretariat farewelled Information Officer Amado ADJUDICATION PANEL MEMBERS AT 30 JUNE 2018 Jovellana and Research and Standards Officer Betheli David Fagan O’Carroll. Betheli, however, continued to perform some John Fleetwood consulting work for the Council from time to time. Julian Gardner AM Justin Levy resigned as Complaints and Compliance Bob Osburn Officer and Catherine Nguyen resigned as Complaints Kirstie Parker and Governance Officer. Alice Beasley joined the Council Russell Robinson as Complaints and Governance Officer in April 2018 and Melissa Seymour-Dearness Melissa Salfi joined as Complaints Officer in May. A number Susan Skelly of part-time Administrative Assistants – Sophie Trigger, Barry Wilson Sophie Edmondstone, Srinidhi Paranji and Chrissy Christofa assisted the Secretariat following the departure of SECRETARIAT AT 30 JUNE 2018 Lynda Burke. John Pender Executive Director The Press Council thanks all past staff for their contribution Alice Beasley Complaints and Governance Officer and wishes them well. Isabella Cosenza Director of Strategic Issues Paul Nangle Director of Complaints Joelle Patten Office Manager Michael Rose Director of Research and Communications Melissa Salfi Complaints Officer

Director of Strategic Issues Complaints Officer Office Manager Isabella Cosenza Melissa Salfi Joelle Patten

23 24 Finances

As stated in its Constitution, the Australian Funding in 2017-2018 Press Council Inc. is “an incorporated Contributions are made by constituent bodies according to a sliding scale based on the agreed budget for the association of organisations and persons year. Contribution bands for 2017-2018 were as follows: established on 22 July 1976”. It is funded • Up to one per cent each: Adelphi Printing, At Large Media, Australian Rural Publishers Association, by contributions made by its constituent The Koori Mail, The Bushland Shire Telegraph, bodies and receives no government funding. Emanila, Community Newspapers Australia, Country Press Australia, Crinkling News, Echo Publications, There was no significant change to the nature Focal Attractions, The Huffington Post Australia, Independent Australia, The New Daily, Private of activities that occurred during the financial Media, Australian Property Journal, Schwartz Media year. The main activities of the Press Council (Trustee for the Liberty 2701 Trust in relation to The Saturday Paper and Trustee for The Monthly Trust were to promote good standards of media in relation to The Monthly), Urban Cinefile, WorkDay practice and to be the principal body for Media, Women’s Agenda • 1-10 per cent each: Australian Associated Press, responding to complaints about material in APN News & Media, Bauer Media Group, Daily Australian newspapers, magazines and Mail.com Australia, Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, nine.com.au online media. • 11-30 per cent: Fairfax Media Total member contributions for the year • 31-60 per cent: . 2017–2018 amounted to $2,100,706; an Triennial commitments increase of 2.88 per cent from 2016–2017. Constituent bodies agree specific funding commitments three years in advance. The agreed increase in contributions for 2017–2018 at 2.5 per cent, for 2018– 2019 at 2 per cent and for 2019–2020 at nil.

25 PROFIT AND LOSS THE AUSTRALIAN PRESS COUNCIL INC For the year ended 30 June 2018

ACCOUNT 2018 2017 Income Core funding (constituent bodies) 2,100,706 2,041,932 Interest 9,517 6,526 Other Income 1,024 495 Total Income 2,111,247 2,048,953 Expenses Amortisation expense 32,453 29,374 Auditors 9,000 10,000 Provision for impairment 39,423 0 Leave expenses (22,937) 6,424 Bank fees 3,750 2,655 Consulting and professional fees 127,567 97,699 Meetings and consultations 130,903 143,549 Consultations, working groups 0 24,731 Depreciation 9,751 60,037 Donations 262 0 Insurance 20,753 10,413 IT development and support 31,606 22,332 IT equipment/software 5,337 1,920 Light and power 4,977 4,100 Long service leave expense 2,727 13,248 Make good expense 37,500 25,000 Office equipment (<$300) 109 0 Office expenses/stationery 15,198 17,118 Office refit 40,468 0 Other – Chair recruitment 64,795 0 Payroll tax 24,346 30,073 Postage and couriers 3,539 2,497 Printing 15,636 14,627 Prizes 681 2,466 Rent and cleaning 216,142 183,848 Salaries 1,094,388 1,178,654 Superannuation 102,654 111,037 Security costs 3,742 4,344 Staff training 12,057 973 Storage/filing 3,255 3,009 Subscriptions 30,057 24,994 Telephone and internet 21,059 21,515 Temp labour hire 54,987 1,944 Total Expenses 2,136,184 2,048,582 (Deficit)/Surplus before income tax (24,937) 371

26 BALANCE SHEET THE AUSTRALIAN PRESS COUNCIL INC As at 30 June 2018

ACCOUNT 30 June 2018 30 June 2017

Assets Current Assets Cash and cash equivalents 905,527 877,153 Trade debtors and other receivables 835,473 27,657 Total Current Assets 1,741,000 904,810 Non-current Assets Property, plant and equipment 12,397 19,800 Intangible assets 17,075 49,528 Total Non-current Assets 29,471 69,327

Total Assets 1,770,471 974,137

Liabilities Current Liabilities Trade and other payables 16,860 54,852 Current tax liabilities 137,477 33,912 Short-term provisions 60,000 25,000 Employee benefits 44,744 67,681 Deferred income 1,073,934 333,024 Total Current Liabilities 1,333,014 514,469 Non-current Liabilities Employee benefits 15,975 13,248 Total Non-current Liabilities 15,975 13,248 Total Liabilities 1,348,989 527,717

Net Assets 421,482 446,419

Equity Retained earnings 421,482 446,419 Total Equity 421,482 446,419

27 28 Member Publications

The following titles are published by, or are members of, Central Sydney City North Messenger the constituent body under which they are listed. They are City North News City South News subject to the Press Council’s jurisdiction in relation to Cooks River Valley Times standards of practice and adjudication of complaints. Cranbourne Leader Cranbourne News Dandenong Journal Diamond Valley Leader Australian Rural Publishers Money Magazine Eastern Courier Messenger Association Motor Echo Agriculture Today NW Fairfield Advance ALFA Lot Feeding OK! Magazine Fairfield City Champion Australian Cotton and Grain Outlook Owner Driver Magazine Ferntree Gully, Belgrave Mail Australian Dairyfarmer People Magazine Frankston Standard Leader Australian Farm Journal Picture Magazine Free Press Leader Australian Horticulture Farm Weekly AWW Puzzle Book Fremantle/Cockburn Gazette Farming Small Areas Real Living Magazine Geelong Indy Good Fruit and Vegetables Street Machine GrapeGrowers and Vignerons Take 5 Greater Dandenong Leader Horse Deals Take 5 Pocket Puzzler Irrigation and Water Resources Take 5 Mega Puzzler Hawkesbury Gazette North Queensland Register TV Week Heidelberg Leader Northern Dairy Farmer Unique Cars Magazine Hills Gazette/ Valley Gazette Queensland Country Life Wheels Hills News Ripe Woman’s Day Hills Shire Times Smart Farmer Woman’s Day Super Puzzler Hobsons Bay Leader Stock and Land Stock Journal 100% Home Girls Hornsby Advocate The Grower Community Newspapers Australia Hume Leader The Land Adelaide Matters Inner West Courier Turfcraft International Advocate Journal News Bauer Media Group Albert and Logan News Knox Leader 4 x 4 Australia Auburn Review Pictorial Australian Gourmet Traveller Magazine Bankstown Canterbury Torch Lilydale & Yarra Valley Leader Australasian Bus and Coach Bayside Leader Liverpool City Champion Australian Geographic Berwick Leader Liverpool Leader Australian House & Garden Magazine Berwick News Logan West Leader Australian Transport News Blacktown Advocate Macarthur Chronicle Australian Women’s Weekly Blacktown Sun Manly Daily Belle (excluding Band-ons) Brimbank & NorthWest Star Weekly Manningham Leader Cosmopolitan Brimbank Leader Maribyrnong & Hobsons Bay Star Weekly Deals On Wheels Caboolture Shire Herald Maribyrnong Leader Earth Movers & Excavators Magazine Camden Narellan Advertiser Maroondah Leader Elle Campbelltown-Macarthur Advertiser Melbourne Leader Empire Magazine Canning Times Melton & Moorabool Star Weekly Farms & Farm Machinery Canterbury Bankstown Express Melton Leader Good Health Magazine Caulfield Glen Eira/Port Phillip Leader Melville Times ’s Bazaar Central Coast Express Advocate Midland/Kalamunda Reporter

29 Member Publications

Mitcham & Hills Messenger Riverine Herald Monash Leader Wentworth Courier Sea Lake & Wycheproof Times Moonee Valley Leader Westside News Seymour Telegraph Moorabbin Kingston/Moorabbin Whitehorse Leader Shepparton News Glen Eira Leader Whittlesea Leader Snowy River Mail Mordialloc Chelsea Leader Wollondilly Advertiser South Gippsland Sentinel Times Moreland Leader Wyndham Leader Southern Riverina News Mornington Peninsula Leader Wyndham Star Weekly Tatura Guardian Mosman Daily Wynnum Herald The Alexandra Eildon Marysville Standard Mountain Views Mail The Baw Baw Shire & Country Press Australia Mt Druitt – St Marys Standard West Gippsland Trader North Lakes Times Bairnsdale Advertiser The Border Times Times Barrier Daily Truth The Border Watch North-West News Benalla Ensign The Buloke Times Northcote Leader Bendigo Weekly The Bunyip Campaspe News The Camperdown Chronicle Northern Messenger Castlemaine Mail The Casterton News Northern Star Weekly Cobden Timboon Coast Times The Colac Herald Northern Times Coonabarabran Times The Courier Northside Chronicle Corowa Free Press The Courier Cobram Pakenham Gazette Corryong Courier The Dimboola Banner Pakenham Officer News Deniliquin Pastoral Times The East Gippsland News Advertiser Fassifern Guardian The Euroa Gazette Parramatta Sun Geelong Independent The Gannawarra Times Penrith City Gazette Gilgandra Weekly The Great Southern Star Penrith Press Gippsland Times & Maffra Spectator The Guardian Swan Hill Pine Rivers Press Golden Plains Miner The Leader Port Stephens Examiner High Country Herald The Loddon Times Hopetoun Courier & Mallee Pioneer The Loxton News Preston Leader Koondrook & Barham Bridge The Maryborough District Advertiser Progress Leader Kyabram Free Press The McIvor Times Ranges Trader Mail Lakes Post The Mirror Redcliffe & Bayside Herald Latrobe Valley Express The Mortlake Dispatch Rouse Hill Courier Mansfield Courier The Murray Pioneer Rouse Hill Times Midland Express The North Central Review South-East Advertiser Mildura Midweek The Ovens & Murray Advertiser South-West News Mildura Weekly The Penola Pennant Southern Courier Molong Express The Plains Producer Southern Gazette Moorabool News The Rainbow Jeparit Argus Mountain Views Mail The River News Springfield News Myrtleford Times & Alpine Observer The Riverine Grazier St George and Sutherland Shire Leader Nhill Free Press & Kaniva Times The Robinvale Sentinel St Marys-Mt Druitt Star North Central News The Shepparton Adviser Stonnington Leader North West Express The Southern Argus Sunbury & Macedon Ranges Star Weekly Numurkah Leader The Spectator Sunbury/Macedon Ranges Leader Pakenham Gazette The Tarrangower Times The City Phillip Island & San Remo Advertiser The Terang Express The Weekly Times Portland Observer and Guardian The Warragul & Drouin Gazette Upper Yarra Mail Pyrenees Advocate The Weekly Advertiser

30 2017-2018

The Yea Chronicle Express Extra (Armidale) Mandurah Mail Wangaratta Chronicle Eyre Peninsula Tribune Manning River Times Waracknabeal Herald Fairfield City Champion Merimbula News Weekly West Wimmera Advocate Farm Weekly Magazine Mid Coast Happenings West Wyalong Advocate Farming Small Areas Mid Coast Observer Yarram Standard Financial Review BOSS Mid State Observer Yarrawonga Chronicle Financial Review Smart Investor Milton Ulladulla Times Yorke Peninsula Country Times Focus (Coffs Coast) Moree Champion Focus (Greater Port Macquarie) Moruya Examiner Fairfax Media Focus (Manning-Great Lakes) Mudgee Guardian AgTrader Monthly Focus (New England) Muswellbrook Chronicle Augusta-Margaret River Mail Forbes Advocate My Family Magazine Australian Cotton Outlook Gippsland Farmer Namoi Valley Independent Australian Senior Gippsland Times Naracoorte Herald Barossa & Light Herald Glen Innes Examiner Narooma News Bay Post Gloucester Advocate Narromine News Beaudesert Times Good Fruit + Vegetables Newcastle Herald Bega District News Good Weekend North Queensland Register Blacktown City Sun Good Wine Guide Northern Argus Blayney Chronicle Goondiwindi Argus Northern Star Weekly Blue Mountains Gazette Goulburn Post Nyngan Observer Bombala Times Goulburn Post Weekly Oberon Review Boorowa News Great Lakes Advocate Official Guide to Tamworth Country Border Chronicle Great Lakes Extra Music Festival Border News Guardian News (Nambucca) On the Coast Braidwood Times Harden Murrumburrah Express Out & About Bunbury Mail Hawkesbury Courier Parkes Champion – Post Busselton-Dunsborough Mail Hawkesbury Gazette Parramatta & Holyroyd Sun Camden Haven Courier Hibiscus Happynings Penrith City Gazette Camden Narellan Advertiser Highlands Post Port Lincoln Times Canberra Times Hills News Port Macquarie Express Canowindra News Horse Deals Port Macquarie News Central Western Daily Hortguide Port Stephens Examiner Coastal Leader Hunter Valley News Post Weekly Coleamabally Observer Hunter Valley Star News Pro-Ag Collie Mail Illawarra Mercury Property Press Colourworld Jimboomba Times Public Sector Informant Cootamundra Herald Katherine Times Queensland Country Life Country Leader Kiama Independent Queensland Cotton & Grains Outlook Country Music Capital News Latrobe Valley Express Queensland Senior Cowra Guardian Life & Leisure Luxury Queensland Smart Farmer Crookwell Gazette Life & Leisure Redland City Bulletin Daily Liberal (Dubbo) The Sophisticated Traveller Review Magazine Donnybrook-Bridgetown- Lithgow Mercury Ripe Manjimup Mail Liverpool City Champion Rouse Hill Courier Dungog Chronicle Lotfeeding Sapphire Coaster Eurobadalla Independent Macleay Valley Happynings Senior Post Eastern Riverina Chronicle Magnet Senior Traveller Explore Tasmania Mailbox Shopper (Dubbo) Shoalhaven & Nowra News

31 Member Publications

Smart Farmer The Grower Wingham Chronicle SMH Good Café Guide The Guyra Argus Wollondilly Advertiser SMH Good Food Guide The Guardian (Swan Hill) Yass Tribune SMH Good Food Guide under $30 The Inverell Times SMH Good Pub Food Guide The Irrigator (Leeton) News Corp Australia Snowy Times The Islander Advertiser Advocate South Australia Senior The Lakes Mail Albert & Logan News South Coast Register The Land The Australian South West Advertiser The Leader (Wagga Wagga) Ballina Shire Advocate Southern Cross (Junee) The Macleay Argus Balonne Beacon Southern Highland News The Maitland Mercury Bayside Leader Southern Weekly Magazine The Moyne Gazette Bayside Northern Suburbs Star St George & Sutherland Shire Leader The Mudgee Weekly St Mary’s-Mt Druitt Star The Murray Valley Standard Big Rigs Stock and Land The Newcastle and Lake Macquarie Star Blacktown Advocate Stock Journal The North West Star bodyandsoul.com.au Sunday Canberra Times The Northern Daily Leader Bowen Independent Sunday Examiner The Queanbeyan Age incorporating Bribie Weekly Sunday Life The Chronicle Brisbane News Sunraysia Daily The Queensland Good Food Guide Buderim Chronicle Tamworth Times The Recorder Buro.com.au Tasmanian Farmer The Rural Byron Shire News Tasmanian Senior The Scone Advocate Caboolture Herald Tenterfield Star The Singleton Argus Cairns Post The Advertiser (Bendigo) The Standard (Warrnambool) Caloundra Weekly The Advertiser (Cessnock) The Stawell Times-News Canning Times The Advertiser & Lake Times The Sunday Age Canterbury-Bankstown Express The Advocate (Burnie) -Herald Capricorn Coast Mirror The Advocate (Hepburn) The Sydney Morning Herald Caulfield Glen Eira/Port Phillip Leader The Age (Port Lincoln) Central (Sydney) The Age Bar Guide The Transcontinental Central & North Burnett Times The Age Good Food Guide The Weekend Financial Review Central Coast Express Advocate The Age Good Food Guide Under $30 The Wimmera Mail-Times Central Queensland News The Ararat Advertiser The Young Witness Central Telegraph The Area News (Griffith) Town & Country Centralian Advocate The Armidale Express (Hunter Valley/North Coast) Chinchilla News The Australian Dairyfarmer Town & Country Magazine The Australian Financial Review Travelways City North News The Australian Financial Review Magazine Turfcraft City South News The Avon Valley & Wheatbelt Advocate Victorian Senior Coast City Weekly The Bellingen Shire Courier Sun Walcha News Coastal Views The Border Mail Wauchope Gazette Coolum & North Shore News The Campbelltown Macarthur Advertiser Wellington Times Courier-Mail The Courier (Ballarat) West Australian Senior Cranbourne Leader The Daily Advertiser (Wagga Wagga) West Coast Sentinel Dalby Herald The Esperance Express Western Advocate The Examiner Western Magazine Daily Telegraph The Flinders News Western Times Darwin Sun The Grenfell Record Whyalla News Delicious

32 Derwent Valley Gazette Mosman Daily The Chronicle Diamond Valley Leader Murilla Advertiser The Coffs Coast Advocate Eastern Courier Nambour Weekly Eastern Reporter news.com.au Echo – Geelong NewsMail The Ipswich Advertiser Fairfield Advance Noosa News The Maryborough Herald Frankston Standard/Hastings North Coast Times The Midweek Fraser Coast Chronicle The Morning Bulletin Fremantle/Cockburn Gazette Northcote Leader The Northern Star Gatton NorthEastern Weekly Geelong Advertiser Northern District Times Northern Weekly The Richmond River Express Examiner Gold Coast Sun Northern Miner The Tablelander GQ Northside Chronicle The Western Star Greater Dandenong Leader North-West News South-West News/Springfield News Guardian Express NT News Darwin Heidelberg Leader Tweed Daily News Penrith Press Vogue Australia Herbert River Express Pine Rivers Press/North Lake Times Vogue Living Hervey Bay Independent Port Douglas & Mossman Gazette Wanneroo-Joondalup Weekender Hills Shire Times Portside Weekly Hornsby and Upper North Shore Preston Leader Weekend Courier Advocate Progress Leader Weekly Times Hume Leader Redcliffe & Bayside Herald Wentworth Courier Inner West Courier Rouse Hill Times Western Times Innisfail Advocate Rural Weekly Westside News Joondalup/Wanneroo Times Scenic Rim Leader Whitehorse Leader Kidspot Seniors Newspaper Knox Leader South-East Advertiser Whitsunday Coast Guardian Laidley Plainland Leader Southern Courier Whittlesea Leader Lilydale & Yarra Valley Leader Southern Gazette Whimn.com.au Lismore Echo Southern Star Wynnum Herald Liverpool Leader Southern Times Lockyer and Brisbane Valley Star South-West News/Springfield News Adelphi Printing Pty Ltd Macarthur Chronicle Sportsman Sydney Monthly Chronicle Mandurah Coastal Times Stanthorpe Border Post Agenda Media Pty Ltd Manly Daily Stirling Times Women’s Agenda Manningham Leader Stonnington Leader Maribyrnong Leader Sunbury/Macedon Ranges Leader At Large Media Maroochy and Kawana Weekly Sunday Herald Sun Melbourne New Matilda Maroondah Leader Sunday Mail Melville Times Sunday Tasmanian Budsoar Pty Ltd Mercury Sunday Telegraph Koori Mail Monash Leader Sunday Territorian Darwin The Bushland Shire Telegraph Pty Ltd Sunshine Coast Daily Moonee Valley Leader Bush Telegraph Weekly Moorabbin Kingston Leader Super Food Ideas Mordialloc Chelsea Leader Crinkling News Pty Ltd Moreland Leader Tasmanian Country Crinkling News Mornington Peninsula Leader Taste

33 Member Publications

Dailymail.com Australia Pty Ltd Daily Mail Australia Echo Publications Pty Ltd The Byron Shire Echo Echonetdaily

Emanila Pty Ltd The Filipino Australian

Focal Attractions Mumbrella

HT&E Limited The Roar Lost at E Minor Techly

The Huffington Post Australia Pty Ltd Huff Post

Independent Australia Pty Ltd Independent Australia

The New Daily The New Daily nine.com.au nine.com.au

Private Media Crikey The Mandarin SmartCompany

Propertyreview.com.au Australian Property Journal

Schwartz Media The Saturday Paper The Monthly

Urban Cinefile Urban Cinefile

WorkDay Media Banking Day

34 35 Summaries of all the Press Council’s adjudications for the 2017-2018 reporting year and the full adjudications are set out in this section.

36 Summaries of 2017–2018 Adjudications

ADJUDICATION 1715: ADJUDICATION 1728: Complainant/The Advertiser (July 2017) Victoria Police/The Sunday Age (November 2017) A complaint that an article containing a poll about A complaint that an article reporting on a man being “South Australia’s high power prices and blackouts” was questioned by two police officers about the theft of a T-shirt inaccurate or misleading. was inaccurate. ADJUDICATION 1719: ADJUDICATION 1725: Complainant/Geelong Advertiser (July 2017) Complainant/The Australian (November 2017) A complaint that an article showing a digitally altered A complaint that an article was unfair and offensive in image that merged half of a missing man’s face with a referring to a specific man in relation to abuse of the generic human skull was offensive and distressing. Medicare system. ADJUDICATION 1714: ADJUDICATION 1730: Complainant/news.com.au (July 2017) Anne Lobo/NT News (November 2017) A complaint that an article containing an embedded video A complaint that an article referring to a car accident that showed the beating of a Brazilian woman caused involving teens as a “prank gone wrong” was misleading, substantial offence and distress. caused substantial offence and intruded on a person’s ADJUDICATION 1713: expectation of privacy. Michelle Box/The Northern Star (July 2017) ADJUDICATION 1729: A complaint that an article concerning the murder of Complainant/NT News (November 2017) a woman was incorrect and caused the victim’s family A complaint that an article reporting on a 14-year-old girl’s serious distress. friendship with two teenagers who were killed in a car ADJUDICATION 1716: accident breached a number of the Press Council’s General Scott Broadhead/Port Stephens Examiner (August 2017) Principles. A complaint that the republishing of a deceased man’s ADJUDICATION 1726: letter to the editor was misleading and distressing. Complainant/news.com.au (November 2017) ADJUDICATION 1706: A complaint that an article about a car accident containing Greg Bennett/The Northern Star (August 2017) a picture of an injured person, whose head appears tilted A complaint by a Councillor that material was not back on a stretcher, was an intrusion of that person’s presented fairly when a publication published a letter to the reasonable expectation of privacy and caused distress. editor on an election day without giving the Councillor an ADJUDICATION 1724: opportunity to respond. Complainant/Manningham Leader (November 2017) ADJUDICATION 1720: A complaint that a publication intruded on a complainant’s Birdlife Australia/The Daily Telegraph (August 2017) reasonable expectation of privacy and gathered information A complaint that an article reporting that certain unfairly when a letter was published as a letter to the editor organisations use federal and state grants to “campaign without her express consent. against major government policy decisions” was ADJUDICATION 1723: misleading and inaccurate. Complainant/The Courier-Mail (December 2017) ADJUDICATION 1722: A complaint that an article referring to certain people Department of Human Services/The Canberra Times as “fake refugees” and “foreign-born criminals” was (August 2017) misleading, unfair and prejudicial. A complaint that an article about Centrelink’s Family Tax ADJUDICATION 1727: Benefits scheme was unfair, inaccurate and misleading. The Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Association ADJUDICATION 1721: of Australasia/The Daily Telegraph Fred Thorpe/The Sunday Telegraph (October 2017) (December 2017) A complaint that an article reporting on an audience member A complaint that an article referring to statistics of people of ABC Television’s Q & A was misleading, unfair, offensive attracted to the same sex among other statistics relating to and intruded on her reasonable expectations of privacy. poor health was misleading and offensive.

37 Summaries of Adjudications

ADJUDICATION 1733: ADJUDICATION 1740: Joan Falconio/NT News (February 2018) Phillip Penfold/The Maitland Mercury (June 2018) A complaint that an article reporting on an anonymous A complaint that publishing a letter to the editor a day letter detailing the murder of a missing man was before an election, concerning multiple members of a substantially distressing. family being nominated for a local council, was unfair and misleading. ADJUDICATION 1732: Complainant/news.com.au (February 2018) ADJUDICATION 1744: A complaint that an article publishing material about Complainant/Daily Mail Australia (June 2018) Islamic State’s “step-by-step guide on how to murder…” A complaint that an article reporting on a “man who caused a risk to public health and safety. jumped in front of a train” breached the Press Council’s Specific Standards on Coverage of Suicide. ADJUDICATION 1734: Complainant/Southern Free Times (March 2018) ADJUDICATION 1739: A complaint that an article breached a number of the Press Complainant/news.com.au (June 2018) Council’s Standards of Practice when it reported on a man A complaint that an article concerning a protest about inflicting self-harm before his death. same-sex marriage was misleading and unfair. ADJUDICATION1735: ADJUDICATION 1742: Bob Brown/The Daily Telegraph (March 2018) Sporting Shooters Association of Australia/Herald Sun A complaint that an article concerning Australian Human (June 2018) Rights Commission chief Gillian Triggs agreeing to speak A complaint that an article was misleading and unfair in at a fundraiser for ex-Greens leader Bob Brown was making sweeping references to “the gun lobby”, “firearms misleading and inaccurate. lobby” and “gun industry” in an article about online abuse. ADJUDICATION 1731: ADJUDICATION 1741: Thai Terrace/The Courier-Mail (April 2018) David Gallagher/The Sun-Herald (June 2018) A complaint that an article concerning a restaurant’s A complaint that an article reporting on the death of a change in the price of prawns due to a ban on imported young woman on the eve of her birthday was misleading, prawns was misleading and gathered by unfair means. intruded on the family’s reasonable expectation of privacy and caused substantial distress. ADJUDICATION 1738: Complainant/The Sunday Telegraph (May 2018) A complaint that an article referring to Yassmin Abdel-Magied when criticising “the failed concept of multiculturalism” was substantially offensive. ADJUDICATION 1718: Chrissie Swan/ Woman’s Day (May 2018) A complaint that an article that incorporated a photograph of Chrissie Swan’s children subjected them to ridicule, caused distress and intruded on their reasonable expectations of privacy. ADJUDICATION 1736: Rachel Petrak/The Sunday Telegraph (May 2018) A complaint that an article, which attributed the death of a pregnant woman to her “unvaccinated toddler,” was inaccurate, intruded on the family’s reasonable expectation of privacy and caused substantial distress.

38 Full Adjudications 2017–2018

Complainant/The Advertiser CONCLUSION The Council’s Standards of Practice require publications to take Adjudication 1715 (July 2017) reasonable steps to ensure factual material is accurate and not The Press Council considered whether its Standards of misleading (General Principle 1) and presented with reasonable Practice were breached by the publication of an article fairness and balance (General Principle 3). The Council has also in The Advertiser on 17 March 2017, headed “BLOWING issued an Advisory Guideline on Opinion Polls suggesting that HIS FUSE: Sparks fly as Premier ambushes minister but publications disclose a number of details about the poll in order exclusive polls reveal SA blames Jay for power crisis” in to allow readers to assess its value. print, and “As Jay Weatherill confronts Energy Minister The Council considers the statement “polls reveal SA blames Josh Frydenberg, poll shows he’s to blame for SA’s power Jay for power crisis” implied as a fact that the poll established crisis” online. that South Australians in general blamed the Premier for The first paragraph said “Advertiser-Galaxy polls show voters the crisis. However, the polling was a sample of only three in key marginal seats believe he [Mr Weatherill] is ‘mostly electorates, and the Council does not consider that this polling to blame’ for the state’s power crisis.” The article continued size and distribution – even involving key marginal seats – can on page six, where it contained a table setting out the details be said to reflect the opinion of the entire state. and results of the poll, showing it had asked respondents: The Council notes that the first paragraph of the article says “In your opinion, who is mostly to blame for South Australia’s the poll “show[s] voters in key marginal seats believe he [Mr high power prices and blackouts?”. The responses were: “The Weatherill] is most likely to blame”. However, only 39 per cent Weatherill Government”, 39 per cent; “The National Energy of those sample voters considered the Weatherill Government Market Operator/AEMO”, 35; “Uncommitted”, 16; and “The responsible, with a remaining majority of voters considering Turnbull Government”, 10. This table was captioned: “Poll otherwise. conducted by Galaxy Research on the evening of March 14. The results are based on the opinions of 519 voters in Adelaide, 555 While the article subsequently made clear the true position, the in Mawson and 517 in Newland. The data has been weighted Council considers that it was not done in a manner sufficient to and projected to reflect the population of each electorate.” redress the inaccuracy and misleading nature of the headline and first paragraph. Accordingly, the Council considers that In response to a complaint, the Council asked the publication the publication failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the to comment on whether it took reasonable steps to ensure the headline and first paragraph were accurate and not misleading, article was accurate and not misleading (General Principle 1) which breached General Principle 1. Further, the Council did and presented with reasonable fairness and balance (General not consider the offer to publish a letter sufficient to remedy Principle 3). the inaccuracy, which warranted a correction. Accordingly, the The publication said opinion polls conducted by Galaxy publication breached General Principle 2. Research are highly reputable and this poll weighed and Given the inclusion of other material in the article such as the projected its responses to reflect the population of each poll question, results and methodology, and the publication’s electorate. It said the table spelling out the question, response subsequent offer to publish a letter to the editor, the Council and methodology was prominently displayed in both the print does not consider the publication failed to take reasonable and online version of the article and the detail of the opinion steps to ensure fairness and balance. Accordingly, the poll was reported in an accurate, fair and balanced way. publication did not breach General Principles 3 or 4. The publication said the electoral seats polled were specifically chosen because of their crucial importance for the state election in March 2018 and this was the first poll conducted under new electoral boundaries made after the Complainant/Geelong Advertiser 2014 election. It said those who read the full article and the poll details as published, both in print and online, would Adjudication 1719 (July 2017) have understood that the headlines faithfully summarised The Press Council considered whether its Standards of the findings. The publication also said it had offered the Practice were breached by an article published by the complainant an opportunity to submit a letter to the editor to Geelong Advertiser in print and online on 16 February address these concerns, but this offer was not accepted. 2017, headed “SKULL CLUE TWIST”.

39 Full Adjudications

The article included a large image on the front page. The important development in a highly publicised criminal saga. left side of the image showed half of a missing man’s face, It said there was a broader public interest in the sense that while the right side of the image was half of a generic human it was an unsolved case, and the compelling presentation of skull, with the two parts digitally altered to form a face. A the story would afford the greatest chance of a member of the sub-headline at the top of the front page read: “REVEALED: public contacting the publication or the authorities with an Police suspect grim beach find could be missing man important piece of information on the case. believed murdered”, and the words “IS IT PAUL KINGSBURY?” The publication added that a relative of a person who has appeared over the bottom of the image. There was a smaller been the subject of ongoing crime reporting had less right image of what appeared to be officials searching a beach to complain about the use of images of the person or about in the bottom-right corner of the front page. The article possible access of the children to such images. The publication continued on page five with the headline “SKULL TWIST”, noted that it had removed the image online in response to including an image of the missing man’s face without digital concerns raised. alteration.

The Press Council’s Standards of Practice require publications CONCLUSION to take reasonable steps to avoid causing or contributing The Press Council considers that it is unlikely that an image of materialIy to substantial offence, distress or prejudice, or the missing man or an image of a skull, by themselves, would a substantial risk to health or safety, unless doing so is have breached the Press Council’s Standards. However, as the sufficiently in the public interest (General Principle 6). image of a skull is an image of human remains, the graphic blending of the two on the front page of the publication was The complainant, the mother of the missing man’s child, said likely to cause substantial offence and distress to the family of the image was offensive and distressing and had the potential the missing man and to the community. to affect the mental health and safety of her child. The complainant said she feared her child might see the image The Council considers that the publication of the image was as the newspaper is accessible to her in many ways that the unlikely to assist in the investigation into the circumstances complainant cannot control. She felt the publication did not act in which the man went missing. It does not consider that his in a responsible way to avoid distress or offence to her child. criminal record justified publication of the image. The Council The complainant said there was nothing scientific about the considers there was no sufficient public interest justifying the image. offence and distress caused by the image. Accordingly, the publication breached General Principle 6. The publication said the article related to a high-profile case that had received significant publicity across media – that of the mystery of a skull that had washed up in Corio Bay. It Complainant/news.com.au said there were no inaccuracies raised, and in the telling of Adjudication 1714 (July 2017) this story, generic images of skulls were used across media, which was a routine scientific-style display. The publication The Press Council considered whether its Standards of also said by illustrating the story with a digitally altered image Practice were breached by an article published by news. of the missing man, an illustration of a skull and the headline com.au on 9 March 2017, headed “Smartphone footage employed, it was conveying that this was a development in the captures Brazilian transgender woman pleading for help ‘skull case’ – that, essentially, the two stories the readers were prior to being beaten to death”. aware of could possibly come together. An embedded video appeared below the headline with the On the issue of distress, the publication believed it was caption “Transgender woman beaten on the streets of Brazil”. important to consider the context of this story. The publication The 32-second video began automatically, and with a four- said the missing man had links to a bikie club and a series second warning which read: “WARNING: The following images of convictions involving assault and criminal damage. Having and/or content may be disturbing/offensive to some viewers. regard to this, the publication thought it was not unreasonable Viewer discretion is strongly advised.” to focus attention on his disappearance by using the image on The video began by showing two men standing near a woman the front page. with her back to the camera sitting on a rough pavement The publication said the story and its presentation – text and outside a building. The woman was wearing shorts and nearly images – were sufficiently in the public interest, conveying an naked on the upper part of her body, with only a small remnant

40 2017–2018

of torn clothing remaining, which she repeatedly tried to pull independent decisions about whether to view it. down to cover herself. The men appear to be talking to her in The publication said it considered there was significant public a foreign language, directing her to get into a wheelbarrow. interest in reporting on the serious issue of violence towards They kick her in the shoulder and back, forcefully pushing her transgender people, not only in Brazil but in Australia and into the side of the wheelbarrow, and repeatedly strike her on worldwide, as well as a public interest in providing access to the head with shoes. reliable information concerning public safety, exposing crime The accompanying article began with the emboldened text: and demonstrating the due administration of justice, which “WARNING: Graphic images”; “HARROWING footage has might assist with the prevention of more such crimes in future. emerged of a transgender woman begging for her life before It said highlighting such attacks on transgender victims could beaten to death”. It said “the video shows the victim being only be done effectively by showing the video. dragged from her home and beaten by men with … planks CONCLUSION of wood” and the men “fling her into a wheelbarrow before taking her to a side street where she was allegedly then The Press Council considers the content of the article, and murdered”, but the embedded video did not feature these particularly the video, to be substantially distressing. The parts of the attack. warnings provided before the video played, and summary of the video in the opening text, amounted to an adequate warning of The article said much of the ordeal was filmed on a the graphic nature of the video. smartphone, that the footage was released in an effort to track down her killers, and that another publication had The Council considers there is a public interest in reporting reported that the video was first circulated among LGBT on the serious issue of violence towards transgender people groups and had helped identify some suspects. It said the worldwide and in providing access to reliable information murder was the latest in a long series of murders and attacks demonstrating the due administration of justice. The material on transgender people in Latin America and according to a shown is distressing, but the most violent footage was named source, the victim “was the fifth transgender person not included. On balance, the Council concludes that the to be murdered last month” in Brazil. It said: “Globally, one publication took reasonable steps to avoid causing transgender person is murdered every 3 days and that more substantial offence, distress and prejudice, given the public than 2000 transgender people were unlawfully killed between interest involved. 2008 and 2015, of these 88 were in Brazil alone.” However, the Council notes that the video played automatically. The article featured four photographs, one a close-up of the It also notes that the wording of the warning at the beginning victim showing her in extreme distress. They were captioned: of the video used only generic language, which would not have “Dandara dos Santos is beaten moments before she was been sufficient in itself in the absence of further warnings murdered by transphobic thugs...”; “Dandara dos Santos contained in the text. Great care needs to be exercised by lies, bloodied, in the street...”; “She is kicked in the face publications to ensure the true nature of the material is by one of the men...”; and “The woman is then flung into described in the warning, and that the audience is provided a wheelbarrow and taken away where she was allegedly with a properly informed and practically exercisable choice. murdered…”.

The Council asked the publication to comment on whether Michelle Box/The Northern Star the material breached its Standards of Practice, in particular Adjudication 1713 (July 2017) General Principle 6, requiring publications to take reasonable steps to ensure they avoid causing or contributing materially The Press Council considered a complaint by Michelle Box to substantial offence, distress or prejudice or risk to health about an article headed “The mysterious and ‘horrible’ or safety, unless doing so is sufficiently in the public interest. death of Sabrina Bremer” in The Northern Star online on 18 August 2016. The publication said it provided multiple warnings to its audience about the graphic nature of the content, including The article concerned the murder of a woman who had been at the beginning of the video and article in bold text. It said reported missing by her 15-year-old daughter, and whose these warnings demonstrated it had taken appropriate steps burned body was found at the side of a road in a remote area of to inform readers that the content was graphic and may northern NSW. The article was updated several times after its distress some people, and readers could make their own initial publication. An update at 8.30am the next day, which has

41 Full Adjudications

since been deleted, reported: “It’s understood the woman was publication failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the tied up to the tree when set alight and, as she decomposed article was accurate and not misleading. The Council also and the rope broke, her body rolled down the roadside considers that in reporting the death in significant detail, the embankment.” At 1.45pm, the article was again updated to publication failed to take reasonable steps to avoid causing identify the woman by name, age and residential area. substantial distress, particularly to the family, and that the public interest did not justify such detail. Accordingly, the The complainant – the victim’s cousin who acted on behalf of publication breached General Principles 1 and 6. the extended family – said the reporting of what was claimed to have happened to the victim caused the family serious The Council considers that the inaccuracy was substantial distress, and that police had later indicated the reporting was and concludes that, due to the technical error in updating incorrect. She said the article was gratuitous and deprived the the website, the publication failed to take reasonable steps deceased of dignity and respect. She said such details should to correct the inaccuracy with appropriate promptness, even not have been reported as fact without being verified, and even though the material was ultimately deleted. Accordingly, the then should not have been published without consideration of publication also breached General Principle 2. the victim’s family. Given this, the Council considers it unnecessary to reach The publication said the article was written by a reporter conclusions as to General Principles 3 and 4. from a related publication and published there before it was republished on the publication’s own website without editorial Scott Broadhead/Port Stephens Examiner checking. It said the report of what happened to the victim was obtained from interviews with two nearby residents and should Adjudication 1716 (August 2017) have quoted them rather than reporting as fact. It said there had been significant speculation about what occurred, much of The Press Council considered a complaint by Scott which was not included in the article. It acknowledged that at Broadhead about the publication on 25 October 2016 of a a later press conference police refuted the residents’ claims. letter to the editor in print and online, headed “Bike path It said the article on the related publication’s website had an asset” in the Port Stephens Examiner. been updated but, due to a technical error, this failed to occur The letter was dated “07.05.09” and was written by the with the article on its own website. The publication apologised complainant’s father, Mr Bill Broadhead, who died in 2014. to the complainant for the error and said that during the It congratulated Port Stephens Council for building and Council’s complaints process the residents’ claims were maintaining a local cycling and walking track and was removed from online and the reporter counselled. accompanied by a photograph captioned “JOB WELL DONE: CONCLUSION Bill Broadhead from Bermagui was impressed by the cycle paths around Grahamstown Dam”. The Council’s Standards of Practice require that publications take reasonable steps to ensure that factual material is The complainant said the letter was written by his father, accurate and not misleading (General Principle 1) and submitted to the publication and published seven years earlier. presented with reasonable fairness and balance (General For it to be republished again two years after his father’s Principle 3). If the material is significantly inaccurate or death was totally insensitive and misled the public that its misleading, or not reasonably fair and balanced, publications message was current. He said the letter should never have must take reasonable steps to provide adequate remedial been reprinted and, if there was reason to do so the author action or an opportunity for a response to be published should have been contacted, which would have revealed that (General Principles 2 and 4). the letter was not current and the author had died. He said he was concerned the publication had not observed the clear The Standards of Practice also require that publications take date on his father’s email which, incorporated the letter, that reasonable steps to avoid causing or contributing materially to his father’s original letter had been addressed to the Mayor substantial offence, distress or prejudice, or to a substantial of Port Stephens Council yet the republished version of the risk to health or safety, unless doing so is sufficiently in the letter was addressed to Port Stephens Council, and queried public interest (General Principle 6). whether the publication has a policy of recycling letters to The Council concludes that in reporting as fact the unverified the editor. The complainant also said the editor could have residents’ claims, which later proved to be false, the easily contacted him prior to publication, given he was well

42 2017–2018

known to the publication. He also said numerous attempts to incorporating the letter appeared in the publication’s Letters contact the editor after publication to discuss the letter went inbox in 2016. Nonetheless, the Council considers that the unanswered. publication of the letter suggested the author of the letter The publication said the publication of the letter was an honest was alive, had recently offered his congratulations on the mistake for which the editor sincerely apologises and takes pathways to Port Stephens Council rather than just the Mayor, full responsibility. It said it did not intend to cause distress was recently impressed by the maintenance of the paths, and or offence in any way. It removed the online version of the that this was the first time this letter had been published. The letter when it was contacted by the Press Council. The editor publication could have avoided these misleading impressions received the email incorporating the letter in the Letters inbox by observing the date on the email or contacting the author. on 21 October 2016, relied on the time of receipt and missed As such, the Council considers the publication failed to the original date in the letter. The publication said above the take reasonable steps to ensure the letter as published was date was a sentence with a current time stamp which read accurate and not misleading, in breach of General Principle 1. “Please include this in your Letters to the Editor column … The Council acknowledges that the publication removed the many thanks Bill Broadhead,” which added to the perception online version of the letter during the course of the Council’s that the letter was sent that day. The publication said its IT complaints process and has since offered to publish an staff had investigated the source of the email and confirmed apology. However, the apparent significant delay in responding it was sent on 21 October 2016. It said the editor did not to the complainant’s concerns amounts to a failure to take know that Mr Bill Broadhead was the complainant’s father, reasonable steps to provide a correction or other adequate that Mr Bill Broadhead had passed away or that the letter remedial action, in breach of General Principle 2. had previously been published. The publication also said the complainant had only contacted it twice. On the material available, the Council does not consider that the level of offence or distress caused by publication of the The publication said normally it would contact any author of letter was so substantial as to lead to a breach of General a letter to the editor providing a controversial opinion but this Principle 6. subject matter was innocuous, and given the renewed focus on completed bike paths across Port Stephens, entirely relevant. It said its lack of reply to the complainant was attributable to Greg Bennett/The Northern Star problems with the communication system resulting partly from new staff. The publication indicated its willingness to publish Adjudication 1706 (August 2017) an apology in print, which was accepted by the complainant. It The Press Council considered a complaint from Cr Greg advised that it had since changed its procedures to contact all Bennett about a letter to the editor published under authors of letters to the editor prior to publication, as well as the heading “Choose Wisely” in The Northern Star in its procedures for staff communicating phone messages from print on 10 September 2016. The letter, submitted by Cr complainants. Simon Clough, Deputy Mayor of Lismore City Council, CONCLUSION expressed the writer’s views of what “Cr Greg Bennett, of the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party … and his The Council’s Standards of Practice require that publications conservative colleagues … will seek to do” if they “get take reasonable steps to ensure factual material in news the majority of seats on Lismore City Council”, and the reports and elsewhere is accurate and not misleading, and is possible implications and risks of such actions, and urged distinguishable from other material such as opinion (General voters to “carefully consider” what they wanted. Principe 1), provide a correction or other adequate remedial action if published material is significantly inaccurate or The complainant said the letter had been published on the day misleading (General Principle 2), and avoid causing or of the local government election and the publication had not contributing materially to substantial offence, distress or contacted him to inform him and allow him the opportunity prejudice, or a substantial risk to health or safety, unless doing to reply in that edition of the newspaper. He said he had so is sufficiently in the public interest (General Principle 6). previously submitted letters for publication and would have The Council accepts that the editor made a mistake in done so had he known the letter was to be published on the missing the actual date on the letter, and on the information day of the election. He said the letter was not accurate but this available, the Council is unable to determine how the email was the subject of a complaint by him to another body and he

43 Full Adjudications

did not raise this issue with the Council. material or omission of key facts (General Principle 3) and where material refers adversely to a person, should provide a The complainant said he believed the letter was published fair opportunity for subsequent publication of a reply if that is to cause maximum damage to his electoral prospects. He reasonably necessary to address a possible breach of General said the letter was signed off as “Deputy Mayor”, when on Principle 3 (General Principle 4). the day of the election that position was declared vacant, and it created a misleading or unfair impression that the The Council considers that the letter set out Cr Clough’s complainant stood as a Shooters member when he stood as arguments to the electorate against the complainant’s an Independent candidate. candidacy and the factual material in support of them. As the letter was published on election day, the only fair time He said he was the leading candidate for mayor at pre-polling for the publication to afford the complainant an opportunity and most likely lost the mayoral election due to votes cast on to respond was in the same edition, which did not occur. election day. He said a retraction or apology was of no value as The Council concludes that the publication failed to take the damage had already been done. reasonable steps to present factual material with reasonable The publication acknowledged the complainant did not have fairness and balance and afford the complainant a fair an opportunity to respond to the letter and in retrospect, opportunity for reply. Accordingly, the publication breached regretted this. However, it said the letter appeared to be General Principles 3 and 4 in this respect. The Council Cr Clough’s honestly held view on the stated positions of considers it was not necessary for this conclusion to the complainant and there was no significantly inaccurate determine the effect, if any, of the publication of the letter on material or omission of key facts. It said as the letter ran on the election result. the YOUR SAY page, it was clearly understood by readers to be the writer’s opinion. The publication also said the complainant had not to its knowledge submitted a letter to the editor in the BirdLife Australia/The Daily Telegraph last two years. Adjudication 1720 (August 2017) The publication denied the letter was published to inflict The Press Council has considered a complaint from damage to the complainant’s electoral prospects. It said its BirdLife Australia about an article published in The Daily coverage had been fair and balanced and it had published Telegraph on 6 December 2016, headed articles supportive of some issues raised by the complainant, “ENVIRO-MENTAL STATE FUNDS FOR GREEN MOANERS” and provided fair and balanced coverage of all mayoral team, in print and “Environmental protesters receiving state which was more prominent than the letter. It said that when and federal grants even as they disrupt major projects” submitted the reference to Cr Clough as Deputy Mayor was online. The print article began on page one, headed accurate and the letter did not state the complainant was “EXCLUSIVE: Taxpayers’ funding for Gang Green”. standing as a Shooters candidate. The article reported that “ECO-activists who rely on taxpayer It said the letter ran in print only and the readership includes millions in funding [are] disrupting major projects and four other local government areas besides Lismore, all government policies and lawsuits.” It said: “The groups are holding elections on that day, so there was only a very small pocketing the generous state and federal grants to campaign per centage of readers eligible to vote in the Lismore election, against major government policy decisions” and this certainly not enough to sway the result one way or the other. “collection of Baird government-funded environment groups It noted that after first preference formal votes were counted, have banded together to target the Premier specifically, even the complainant trailed by a significant margin behind the protesting outside his Manly electoral office”. candidate elected as mayor and was in any event returned as a councillor. It reported that the “Nature Conservation Council [NCC] … launched five protests against the Baird government in the last CONCLUSION year and formed an umbrella activist group called Stand Up for Nature to lead the charge”; that “[f]ive other taxpayer-funded The Council’s Standards of Practice require that publications groups including Total Environment Centre, WIRES, Birdlife take reasonable steps to ensure factual material is presented Australia and the National Parks Association of NSW joined with reasonable fairness and balance and writers’ expressions the organisation and started protesting”; and that of opinion are not based on significantly inaccurate factual “[e]ach organisation tapped into a $1.2 million grant offered

44 2017–2018

by The Environmental Trust and were paid between $30,000 received an Environment Trust grant. The NCC started Stand and $141,000 over two years to ‘engage’ the community”. The Up for Nature to specifically fight various government policies article also featured a table headed “CASH AND CARRY-ON” shortly before the complainant joined. The publication said listing four organisations, firstly BirdLife Australia, which it it had information that the $141,000 government grant to said “received two grants from the environmental trust, one the NCC goes directly into funding the NCC’s core costs of for $132,000 and another for $963,276”. operation and its 2015–16 annual report states that its work included conservation groups combining to form the Stand The complainant said it is a non-partisan conservation up for Nature Alliance to stop then Premier Baird rolling organisation that relies on volunteers to protect birds and back land-clearing laws, and the complainant was one of is proud of its public standing. It said the article was untrue these groups. The publication also said while the complainant in suggesting it uses money from government grants to receives money from multiple grants for specific programs campaign against major government policies. All funds from which do not involve advocacy, it also involves itself in protests the NSW Environmental Trust grants referred to in the table, such as advertising them on its Facebook page. the Saving Our Species Partnership Grants Program and the Lead Environmental Community Groups Program, are used The publication said its journalist attempted to contact under contract with clear deliverables in targeted species the complainant prior to publication both by email and by recovery programs. telephone and received no response. As the complainant was only one of a number of organisations referred to in the The complainant said Stand Up for Nature is a loose and article, it did not consider it appropriate to delay publication diverse group with which it has no formal relationship; it is not until the complainant’s response was obtained. It said that represented on its governing board, nor has it received any following publication, it published the complainant’s letter, resources or funding from it. Its only interaction is to allow so providing it with an opportunity for response. It said the Stand Up for Nature to use its logo and promote a couple of second article was a follow-up story focused on the audit of all events on BirdLife Australia’s Facebook page. existing allocations and eligibility criteria and did not name the The complainant said the facts could have been easily complainant. checked prior to publication. However, the only attempt the publication made to check the facts or seek comment was via CONCLUSION an email at 5.02pm on the evening prior to publication, which The Council’s relevant Standards of Practice require that did not provide any deadline and could not be responded to publications take reasonable steps to ensure factual material in the limited time available. After reading the article, the is accurate and not misleading and is distinguishable from complainant promptly submitted a letter to the editor in which it denied using government funds for advocacy, which was other material such as opinion (General Principle 1), that published on 8 December. It said a second article, published factual material is presented with reasonable fairness and on 9 December, referred to the earlier coverage without any balance, and that writers’ expressions of opinion are not based correction, qualification or reference to the complainant’s on significantly inaccurate factual material or an omission of denial, and so continued to imply wrongdoing. key facts (General Principle 3). If the material is significantly inaccurate or misleading, or unfair or unbalanced, publications The publication said the point of the story was to highlight must take reasonable steps to provide adequate remedial a public interest concern as to whether taxpayer funds are action or an opportunity for a response to be published being used appropriately. It did not state that the complainant (General Principles 2 and 4). had misused money from grants to campaign against major policy decisions. Instead, the article said groups campaigning The Council considers that the article presented as a against the government received government funds to carry verified fact that the complainant was one of a number of out their work and projects. The publication said an audit organisations using government grants for advocacy against was established to ascertain whether any of the groups had major government projects. It was not reported in a qualified misappropriated or misused such public money on protests way or with any attribution to a source. and political campaigns. On the information available, the Council considers that the It said the complainant is part of Stand Up for Nature, which complainant does not use money from government grants displays the complainant’s logo on its website. Stand Up for for advocacy or disrupting major projects and government Nature directly received funds through the NCC, which also policies. The Council does not consider that the level of

45 Full Adjudications

the complainant’s engagement with Stand Up for Nature the debt notices were therefore not “bogus” or sent in “error”. amounted to using grants in such a way. The complainant said these debts were reduced to zero dollars once the recipients lodged their return or indicated The Council accepts the publication sought information from lodgement was not required, which allowed the Department the complainant by email prior to publication, and is not able to properly assess their entitlements. It said this practice to reach conclusions about the disputed information as to in regard to FTB debts has operated for many years, and telephone contact. However, the suggestions being made that beneficiaries are fully and repeatedly advised of the about the complainant were serious, and required greater arrangements and their obligations. It added that the article’s steps to seek confirmation than were taken by the publication, front-page placement and its headline reference to this as a and there was no apparent urgency requiring publication “debacle” gave prominence to these inaccuracies. before taking such steps. The inaccuracy and unfairness was accentuated by the references such as “GREEN MOANERS” It said the article’s statements that “the federal government and “CASH AND CARRY ON”. The Council concludes that the has conceded” Centrelink “hit … 21,000 families with bogus publication did not take reasonable steps to ensure accuracy, FTB debts” and that the Department “blames the error rate fairness or balance in the reporting. Even if the information of at least 33 per cent on its clients’ failure to ‘engage’”, imply presented as verified fact was to be considered an expression it accepted the debt notices were “bogus” and an “error”. The of opinion, the publication did not take reasonable steps complainant said this is also inaccurate and misleading as to distinguish factual material from opinion as required the Department maintains the debt notices were lawful and by General Principle 1. Accordingly, it breached General correct, and that this was clearly explained in its submission Principles 1 and 3. to the parliamentary inquiry on the subject. The complainant said it was given no opportunity to respond The publication promptly published a letter from the to the assertions in the article prior to publication and, complainant in which it was given an opportunity to respond following publication, was denied a correction or letter to the to the impression created by the article. In the circumstances, editor in response. the Council considers the publication took reasonable steps to provide remedial action and a sufficient response, and did not The publication said the description of these debts as “bogus” breach General Principles 2 or 4. was accurate because in its view the debts never really existed, and the complainant sent 21,400 families demands Department of Human Services/ to repay debts that were later proven not to be owed. It said debts proven not to be owed are legitimately described The Canberra Times as “bogus” debts. The publication said at no point was it Adjudication 1722 (August 2017) reported, claimed, or even implied in the article that the complainant was acting illegally in making its demands for The Press Council considered a complaint by the money and the article prominently reported the complainant’s Department of Human Services about an article in The position that its demands for money not actually owed Canberra Times on 30 March 2017, headed “Another debt were a direct result of the recipients’ failure to lodge a tax debacle” in print and “Centrelink hits 21,000 families with return. The publication said the placement of the article bogus FTB [Family Tax Benefit] debts” online. The article on the front page duly reflects the gravity of a government reported on Centrelink’s “Family Tax Benefit recovery agency demanding money from more than 21,000 Australian effort” and in particular, the approximately “21,400 of the families on a false premise. It said citizens being targeted by [65,000] families hit with the debt notices [who] were able the Department for alleged debts not owed should be fully to prove they owed Centrelink nothing”. apprised of the processes that led to demands for money in The complainant said the article’s references to the FTB debt order to adequately defend themselves. notices as “bogus”, being sent in “error” and a “debacle” were It said references to the government “conced[ing]” it sent inaccurate and misleading. It said the 21,000 debt notices “bogus” debt notices and “blam[ing] the error rate … on its were sent to recipients of the benefit if they or their partners clients’ failure to ‘engage’” are accurate and not misleading. had failed to lodge an income tax return, or did not notify the It said that the words “bogus” and “error rate” were not Department that they were not required to lodge an income directly attributed to the Department as quotes but were tax return by the end of the lodgement year. It said the law based on the publication’s reading of the complainant’s clearly considers a debt to exist in these circumstances and submission to a parliamentary inquiry.

46 2017–2018

It also said the article relied on, and was a fair and accurate Fred Thorpe/The Sunday Telegraph report of, facts disclosed in the complainant’s submission to a parliamentary inquiry, which was produced with the full Adjudication 1721 (October 2017) expectation of it becoming public. In such circumstances, the publication said it had no obligation to contact the complainant The Press Council considered a complaint by Fred Thorpe to seek comment on the facts disclosed in that document. It about an article in The Sunday Telegraph on 26 February said that, as the article included the complainant’s side of the 2017, headed “Sack ABC board and end the warped bias” issue and the reporting was not inaccurate, no remedial action in print and online. The article referred to the opinion- was offered. writer’s appearance as a panel member on the ABC Television’s Q&A program and, among other matters, CONCLUSION commented on a question posed by the complainant to the The Council’s Standards of Practice applicable in this matter Attorney-General, George Brandis, about an impending require that publications take reasonable steps to ensure review of her pension entitlement. that factual material is accurate and not misleading and is Appearing as an audience member on the program, the distinguishable from other material such as opinion (General complainant asked: “Can George Brandis explain why Principle 1), that factual material is presented with reasonable politicians’ expenses are extravagant and go unchecked, while fairness and balance, and that writers’ expressions of opinion I am having my Disability Support Pension reviewed, despite a are not based on significantly inaccurate factual material or an 28-year exemplary career as a teacher then having to resign omission of key facts (General Principle 3). If the material is because of ill health? My $22,000 yearly pension with which I significantly inaccurate or misleading, or unfair or unbalanced, am raising three exceptional children, would be less than most publications must take reasonable steps to provide adequate pollies spend in a month.” In responding to a question from remedial action or an opportunity for a response to be the host of the program, the complainant said she had spent published (General Principles 2 and 4). most of her “weekend throwing up from absolute fear” that The Council notes that the publication does not dispute that her pension might be removed. a FTB debt arises once recipients of the benefit fail to lodge In commenting on the complainant’s appearance on the their income tax return, or fail to notify the Department they program, the article referred to her as “aggrieved at being were not required to lodge an income tax return by the end of selected for review by Centrelink’s current automated data- the lodgment year. The Council is satisfied the approximately matching program”, and as a “Labor-Greens supporter 21,000 debts referred to in the article did exist at the time who despite her disability found the stamina to aggressively the notices were issued, despite later being reduced to campaign for former host James Mathison”. zero dollars. The Council considers that, especially as the The article also mentioned the complainant’s appearance complainant’s submission explained how the relevant debts on an episode of “the Backyard Blitz television program”, arose, the publication failed to take reasonable steps to ensure accuracy by describing the approximately 21,000 referring to her as “the beneficiary of one of their home debts as “bogus” and sent in “error”. Accordingly, the Council makeovers and [who] had a rooftop garden constructed atop concludes that General Principle 1 was breached. The Council the family’s Manly beachside apartment”. accepts, however, that there was no requirement to seek the It added: “She might have chilled a little if she had sat by her complainant’s comment prior to publication, in circumstances designer ‘glazed water bowl and fountain’ which ‘provide the in which it relied on the complainant’s public submission. calming sounds of trickling water’. Impossible not to feel As to remedial action, the Council considers that the material sympathetic for anyone finding it difficult to cope, but surely was significantly inaccurate and misleading. In not publishing Ms Thorpe has nothing to worry about?” The article also a correction in this regard, or a letter to the editor from the speculated about the superannuation of the complainant, complainant, the Council considers the publication failed identified as “a former teacher of 28 years”: “No mention of to provide adequate remedial action. Accordingly, General her superannuation, which, if she were a member of the uber- Principle 2 was breached. generous defined benefit scheme under the old teachers plan, almost bankrupted NSW.” Given its conclusions on other aspects of the complaint, the Council considers it unnecessary to reach conclusions in The complainant said the article was misleading and relation to General Principles 3 and 4. unfair in a number of respects, intruded on her reasonable

47 Full Adjudications

expectation of privacy, and caused her substantial distress. intruding on a person’s reasonable expectations of privacy The complainant said it was misleading and unfair to refer (General Principle 5) or causing or contributing materially to to her as a “Labor-Greens supporter” who had “aggressively substantial offence, distress or prejudice, or to a substantial campaign[ed] for … James Mathison”. The complainant said risk to health or safety (General Principle 6), unless doing so is she does not support any one party or person. Her Twitter sufficiently in the public interest. profile, from which the publication apparently sourced its The Council considers the article’s references to the information, and which has since been deactivated, reflected complainant’s superannuation, her appearance on the television that she had previously voted for an Independent and a Liberal program Backyard Blitz, her having “found the stamina to candidate. Her campaigning for James Mathison extended aggressively campaign” for a political candidate “despite her only to letter-boxing leaflets in a few streets with her children. disability”, and that she “surely has nothing to worry about”, The complainant also said she was not a member of the collectively implied she is an undeserving welfare recipient. The “uber-generous” superannuation fund to which the article references to her superannuation, political allegiances, and referred, and her comments on the program did not concern the extent of her campaigning were based upon speculation the issue of “data-matching program” raised in the article. and a small selection of comments made by the complainant The complainant said she had been humiliated by the article’s on social media. The Council considers that the publication comments and that her name had been maligned and her failed to ensure factual material was presented with reasonable honesty and integrity brought into question. The complainant fairness and balance, especially given the complainant is not a said by simply asking a question of an elected representative, public figure but simply a member of the public. Accordingly, she did not make herself a public figure that enabled the the Council concludes that General Principle 3 was breached. publication to publicly ransack her life. As the complainant did not seek a right of reply, the Council concludes that General Principle 4 was not breached. The publication responded that the opinion column did not state what, if any, superannuation scheme the complainant The Council considers that given the complainant appeared was or is a member of, nor did it claim the complainant was a on the Q&A program and commented on her personal member of any teachers’ superannuation scheme. In relation circumstances, her reasonable expectation to privacy was to political affiliations, it said the complainant is on the public diminished as it related to such commentary. Accordingly, the record as supporting James Mathison, her Twitter profile Council concludes that the publication did not breach General photo showed a picture of former Labor Prime Minister Julia Principle 5 or Privacy Principle 7. Gillard, she has commented publicly that she did not vote for The Council accepts that the article caused the complainant and , and publicly urged people to vote against her family considerable distress. former Liberal Prime Minister . In relation to the reference to the complainant’s appearance on Backyard Blitz, The Council also accepts that it is legitimate journalistic the publication said this contributed to the complainant’s practice to provide background to scrutinise people involved in public profile and helped the reader understand who she is. public debate. However, in this instance, the Council does not The publication said by appearing on Q&A, the complainant accept the complainant was a public figure who warranted the had chosen to take part in a public debate before more than level of scrutiny applied by the publication to her personal life. a million people, and it is legitimate journalistic practice to The Council notes that the complainant merely asked a scrutinise such people, particularly when the issue of audience question, albeit on live television, and could not be reasonably selection of the program is a matter of public record, public described as either being a public figure or being involved in debate and public interest. the broader debate about the government’s data-matching program. There was no public interest in scrutinising the CONCLUSION complainant’s background to the extent the publication did, The Council’s Standards of Practice applicable in this matter and there is a strong countervailing public interest in ensuring require that publications take reasonable steps to ensure the public is free to participate in public debate without factual material is presented with reasonable fairness and unwarranted scrutiny. Given this, the Council concludes that the balance, and that writers’ expressions of opinion are not based publication failed to take reasonable steps to avoid contributing on significantly inaccurate factual material or an omission materially to substantial distress which was not sufficiently of key facts (General Principle 3). The Standards of Practice in the public interest. Accordingly, the publication breached also require that publications take reasonable steps to avoid General Principle 6 in this respect.

48 2017–2018

The publication said this demonstrated the writer’s confidence Victoria Police/The Sunday Age in his version of events and these factors contributed to the Adjudication 1728 (November 2017) publication’s belief in the accuracy of the events as described. The publication said because the article was not a news piece, The Press Council considered a complaint from Victoria its processes were less stringent than they might otherwise Police about an article published in The Sunday Age on have been. Accordingly, it did not seek comment from the 25 October 2015, headed “Strip-searched in Carlton on a complainant. sunny afternoon” in print and online. The publication said upon receiving the complainant’s The article, written in the first person, described the writer’s concerns about the article, it immediately removed the online experience of being questioned by two police officers at a bus version. The publication said it did not issue a correction or stop in Lygon Street about a theft of a T-shirt from a nearby apology as it had observed discrepancies in the complainant’s store. The article suggested that the police considered the version of events as against CCTV footage of the incident. The writer to be a possible suspect. The incident occurred mid- publication said it accepted the writer had been found guilty afternoon, in view of any passers-by and passengers in a of making a false report to police, but maintained its belief stationary bus. The writer said one of the officers “squatted that an inappropriate search had been conducted by the police with a camera and told [the writer] to take down [his] pants officers, albeit not as described in the article. The publication to check whether the stolen T-shirt was hidden there”, and said it was not willing to print a correction in the absence of “to drop his underpants” as well. He said the officer “took conclusive evidence supporting the complainant’s version of photographs of [his] pubic hair”, “[t]hen demanded that [he] events and it had instead suggested the matter be referred for take down [his] trackies at the back” and the officer “knelt investigation by an independent ombudsman. and archived [his] worn out old bum”. The article stated that The publication said following the Court’s decision, it published a number of other questions were asked of the writer before an article in print and online headed “Writer found guilty of he was then able to “pull [his] pants up again”. The article was making a false report” on 4 June 2017. This article referred accompanied by a cartoon of two police officers photographing to the writer’s account of events as published in the original a man with his pants at his ankles. article, the complainant’s immediate denial, and the Court’s The writer made a detailed complaint to Victoria Police on findings regarding the conduct of the officers. The publication 23 October 2015. said it believed this article accurately and ethically corrected The complainant said the writer’s assertions in the article the record. were found to be false by the Victoria Police Professional CONCLUSION Standards Command. In a letter dated 1 November 2015, Victoria Police informed the publication of this and called for The Council’s Standards of Practice applicable in this matter a correction. In March 2017, the writer was found guilty by require that publications take reasonable steps to ensure the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria of making a false report to that factual material is accurate and not misleading, is police. The complainant asked the publication on a number of distinguishable from other material such as opinion (General occasions over a lengthy period of time to print a correction, Principle 1), is presented with reasonable fairness and including a request following the Court’s finding of guilt, but no balance, and that writers’ expressions of opinion are not based correction was printed. The complainant also said that given on significantly inaccurate factual material or omission of the seriousness and unusual nature of the writer’s allegations, key facts (General Principle 3). If the material is significantly the publication ought to have contacted it prior to publication inaccurate or misleading, or refers adversely to a person, to seek comment on the alleged events. The complainant said publications must take reasonable steps to provide adequate the article unfairly tarnished its reputation and could have remedial action or an opportunity for a response to be significantly affected the careers of the officers involved. published (General Principles 2 and 4).

The publication said it had a four-decade-long association with The Council considers that the serious nature of the article’s the writer, who was “of some renown” and who had published allegations required the publication to take more steps than a book on the police force. It said it accepted the article in good it took before publication to verify the writer’s account, such faith. It had refrained from publishing the article until after as contacting the complainant for corroboration or comment. a formal statement by the writer was lodged with the police. The Council does not consider the publication’s reliance on its

49 Full Adjudications

relationship with the writer and his filing of a formal complaint The publication stated that the man’s refugee status, ethnicity to the police amounted to reasonable steps to ensure the and conviction and sentence for fraud were matters of public article’s account of events was accurate and not misleading. record; they had been published in a Victorian Court of Appeal Accordingly, the publication breached General Principle 1. judgment and had also been the subject of considerable publicity. The publication eventually accepted the article was inaccurate but, due to its reservations about the complainant’s version The publication said the reference to the man’s refugee status of events, did not at any stage make an apology or correction. was of public interest, and not intended to be pejorative. The Council considers that, notwithstanding the publication’s Rather, it could be interpreted as an example of a refugee reservations about the events of the day, sufficient evidence making a success of his life in Australia by going to university was provided to the publication prior to the Court hearing and graduating in medicine. It said the article did not suggest to demonstrate the article was significantly inaccurate and the man’s refugee status or ethnicity had anything to do with misleading on a number of key points, including statements his defrauding Medicare. It said a government department that the police officer directed the writer to take down his pants cited the man’s circumstance as one of the prime examples and underpants and photographed his pubic hair. After the of medical fraud and the only reason it was highlighted was Court hearing and conviction, there was no doubt about the because of the large sum of money involved and the fact it inaccuracies. The article in June 2017, which did not identify or went undetected for seven years. It said the phrase “how easy acknowledge the inaccuracies in the original article, does not it can be to make serious money in this country” went to the constitute adequate remedial action. As such, the publication thrust of the article that the Medicare system is open to abuse. also breached General Principle 2. The Council encourages The publication said any offence, distress or prejudice caused the publication to publish a correction and apology, which it would be minor compared to that caused by the man’s considers is warranted in the circumstances. conviction and sentence, and would also be outweighed by Given its conclusions on other aspects of the complaint, the the public interest in highlighting such a major case of Council considers it unnecessary to reach conclusions in medical fraud. relation to General Principles 3 and 4. CONCLUSION Complainant/The Australian The Council considered the detailed personal information provided about the man’s life story – including his refugee Adjudication 1725 (November 2017) status and ethnicity in the opening paragraph – could be considered unbalanced and unfair as it stood in contrast The Press Council considered whether its Standards of to personal information provided in relation to other cases Practice were breached by an article published in The of medical fraud highlighted, which provided no further Australian on 6 March 2017 headed “SICK SYSTEM OPEN background beyond the gender of the perpetrators. However, TO ABUSE: Fake Medicare claims have led to payouts the Council accepted that in investigating background for worth millions” in print and “Medicare: Sick system open the story the journalist had been referred to the case by the to abuse” online. relevant government department as one of the worst cases The article, before proceeding to explore flaws in Medicare of medical fraud in terms of the large sum of money involved that made it susceptible to fraudulent claims, began: “Hung and the fact that it went undetected for seven years; that it Dien Phan came to Australia as a refugee in 1979 after fleeing was routine to commence a complex feature article with some Vietnam with his family, obtained a degree in medicine from background information on a subject; and that the article Monash University and then discovered how easy it can be to did not labour the reference beyond the opening paragraph, make serious money in this country.” before proceeding to an exposition of a broad systemic issue. In the circumstances, the Council concluded that the article Following a complaint, the Council asked the publication to was not sufficiently unfair or unbalanced as to breach General comment on whether, in making specific references to the Principles 3 and 4. man’s refugee status and ethnicity, it took reasonable steps to ensure factual material was presented with reasonable fairness The Council considered that the references to the man’s and balance (General Principle 3), and avoid contributing refugee status and ethnicity could be considered gratuitous materially to substantial offence, distress or prejudice, without and irrelevant given that he came to Australia as an infant. The sufficient justification in the public interest (General Principle 6). references could cause offence, distress or prejudice to people,

50 2017–2018

especially people of Vietnamese origin and refugees generally, The publication said that the accident was then “believed to by potentially characterising them in a negative light. have been the devastating result of a prank gone wrong”, according to several sources at the time. The publication said However, the Council considered that offence, distress or police at the time corrected some of the media for falsely prejudice caused by the article was not substantial, given reporting that the driver had “swerved” but the publication had the man’s personal information had been published in court not reported the “swerving” allegation at any time. records and elsewhere, and there was only one reference to the man’s refugee status and ethnicity in a lengthy article, in The publication said it attempted to present the relationship which his was a most significant example of medical fraud. between the teenage girl and the complainant’s nephew in Had the article continued to focus on the man’s ethnicity a context of friendship. It also made attempts to speak with and refugee status, the Council considered that it could have members of the boys’ families but was told they were too caused substantial offence, distress or prejudice. Accordingly, distraught to speak on the day, which it respected. the publication did not breach General Principle 6 in this The publication said the article was presented as a strong instance. and heartfelt tribute to two popular young men, which was unfortunately misconstrued. It said it never intended the story NOTE: The article was written by a member of the Council who to exacerbate a tragic and terrible time and if the families is presently on a leave of absence, and has had no involvement thought it had done so, it apologised. in the Council’s complaints-handling process. CONCLUSION Anne Lobo/NT News The Council’s Standards of Practice require that publications Adjudication 1730 (November 2017) take reasonable steps to ensure factual material in news reports and elsewhere is accurate and not misleading, and is The Press Council considered a complaint about a front- distinguishable from other material such as opinion (General page article in NT News on 27 February 2017 in print, Principle 1), provide a correction or other adequate remedial headed “HE TOLD ME HE LOVED ME” in quotation marks, action if published material is significantly inaccurate or superimposed on a large photograph of a 14-year-old girl. misleading (General Principle 2), and to avoid intruding on a Below this were two sub-headlines, the first of which read person’s reasonable expectation of privacy (General Principle “Friends shattered by teen highway tragedy”. The article 5) or causing or contributing materially to substantial distress was also published online, headed “Friends in shock over or risk to health or safety (General Principle 6), unless doing death of Darwin teens … on Stuart Highway”. so is sufficiently in the public interest. The article concerned the “death of two young men … tragically The Council accepts the publication’s claim that it relied killed in an accident on the Stuart Highway – now believed on several sources for the belief that a “prank gone wrong” to have been the devastating result of a prank gone wrong”. had caused the accident. The Council considers that this The photograph of the teenage girl occupied most of the statement was not presented as a verified fact. Accordingly, page and showed her gazing pensively into the distance. The the Council does not uphold the complaint based on General article referred in passing to friends and family as missing Principles 1 and 2 in this respect. the deceased, but most of the article concerned the girl’s The Council considers that the public interest in reporting friendship with the boys, her reaction to their deaths and on matters of road safety outweighed any breach of the her last contact with them at a party the night of the accident. complainant’s family’s reasonable expectation of privacy in It also reported comments from the girl that she “would relation to the coverage. Accordingly, the Council does not never forget” the boys, with one of whom she “had a uphold the complaint based on General Principle 5. ‘special connection’”. The Council accepts that the publication intended the article The complainant, the aunt of the latter boy, said that reporting to be a tribute to the boys. However, given the absence of the accident as the result of a “prank gone wrong” did not comments or photographs from other friends or family, the match the information conveyed by the police to the family. heavy emphasis on the teenage girl and on her reaction and The complainant also said the print headline, together with the comments, and the likely emotional state of those affected, prominent photo of the girl and the focus on her reaction, with the article was likely to cause substantial offence and distress, only passing reference to the family, caused them without sufficient public interest. Accordingly, the Council added stress. upholds the complaint based on General Principle 6.

51 Full Adjudications

Complainant/NT News It said it was aware of the stress a story of this nature could cause to those affected. It was never its intention to cause Adjudication 1729 (November 2017) offence or distress; the story was only ever meant as a strong tribute to two popular young men, with the complainant’s The Press Council considered a complaint about a front daughter featured upfront as a close friend. The publication page article in NT News on 27 February 2017 in print, said this unfortunately appeared to have been misconstrued headed “HE TOLD ME HE LOVED ME” in quotation marks, and, for that, it apologised. superimposed on a large photograph of the complainant’s 14-year-old daughter. Below this were two sub-headlines, The publication said it would strive to improve its processes the first of which read “Friends shattered by teen highway for handling such sensitive issues. It said staff involved in the tragedy”. The article was also published online, headed story had met to discuss why it triggered the response it did “Friends in shock over death of Darwin teens … on Stuart and to consider ways to ensure it did not occur in future. Highway”. CONCLUSION The article concerned the “death of two young men killed in a The Council’s Standards of Practice require publications car accident”. The photograph of the complainant’s daughter to take reasonable steps to avoid intruding on a person’s occupied most of the page and showed her gazing pensively reasonable expectation of privacy (General Principle 5), into the distance. The article referred in passing to friends and causing or contributing materially to substantial, distress family missing the deceased, but most of the article concerned offence or a substantial risk to health or safety (General the daughter’s friendship with the boys, her reaction to their Principle 6), or publishing material gathered by unfair means deaths and her last contact with them at a party the night of (General Principle 7) – unless doing so is sufficiently in the the accident. It also reported her comments that she “would public interest. never forget” the boys, with one of whom she “had a ‘special connection’”. Given the complainant consented to her daughter being interviewed and photographed, the Council does not consider The complainant said she was not informed the article would that a reasonable expectation of privacy had been breached. focus on her daughter and was led to believe it would be a Accordingly, the Council does not uphold the complaint based tribute to the two boys from various people who knew them. on General Principle 5. Nor did the Council consider, in such She said the focus on her daughter offended many of the circumstances, that the material for publication was gathered boys’ family and friends. As a result, her daughter was a by deceptive or unfair means. Accordingly, the Council does victim of cyberbullying, which led to significant distress. The not uphold the complaint based on General Principle 7. complainant said if they had been told how the article would be presented, she and her husband would not have agreed to However, the Council notes the emphasis on the complainant’s their daughter being interviewed and photographed. daughter and particularly the prominent photograph of her on the front page. It also notes her age and likely emotional state, The complainant said she asked the publication to apologise to the subject matter about which she was being interviewed the families and friends of the boys but this had not occurred. and the close proximity in time to the death of the boys. Given The publication said the article accurately recorded what these sensitive circumstances, the publication ought to have family, friends and the complainant’s daughter told it. It said informed the complainant that an article that focused on the report of the death of two boys was in the public interest her daughter rather than tributes from a number of friends as road tragedies are a serious matter of public interest. The was proposed. Having regard to these factors, the Council article was sympathetic to the boys and the thoughts of their considers that the publication failed to take reasonable steps friends who described them in kind and considered words. to avoid causing substantial offence and distress to those The publication said the complainant consented to it close to the boys. The public interest in the reporting on interviewing and photographing her daughter and was present matters of road safety did not justify the prominent focus on when this took place and, accordingly, it did not agree to the complainant’s daughter. Accordingly, the Council upholds publish an apology. the complaint based on General Principle 6.

It said it nevertheless took the complaint very seriously. It accepted that the story was particularly sensitive to the families and friends involved due to the ages of the boys.

52 2017–2018

Complainant/news.com.au road accidents, which are often graphic, and similar images were published on other major media in this instance, Adjudication 1726 (November 2017) including websites and television.

The Press Council considered whether its Standards of It also said the public interest in this instance outweighed Practice were breached by an article published in any issues of privacy or distress. The accident was a major news.com.au on 7 March 2017, which began: “A WOMAN public event causing significant traffic disruption. It occurred has died and two others seriously injured in a head-on on one of the busiest roads in Australia, in which southbound crash on the Hume Highway at Wilton, south of Sydney.” traffic was closed and banked up for five kilometres from It continued: “Emergency crews are also working to 7.50am until past noon on the day. Given this, it was in the release another woman trapped in a second vehicle in public interest to report on the accident and update the story the southbound lanes of the Hume Highway, about 1km regularly with developments in rescue efforts and traffic south of Picton Rd. The two vehicles collided just before mobility. It said the issue of road fatalities is also one of 8am today.” significant public interest and reporting on an accident, such as this one, provides access to reliable information on matters The article, which was published within half an hour of the of public health and safety. accident, followed with images of the scene of the accident, CONCLUSION the first of which depicted a heavily damaged vehicle with its doors open and roof peeled back, and emergency crew The Press Council considers that while the accident occurred members including police surrounding and leaning into the on a public road and the injured person would not have been car. In the centre of the frame was a face of a person whose easily identifiable by the public at large, nevertheless the head appears tilted back on a stretcher. The image, which person had a reasonable expectation of privacy and the image included a television station’s logo, was captioned: “Pheasants of the injured person and the car would be sufficiently clear Nest: Fatal crash Hume Motorway closed in both directions for relatives and friends to identify the person. The image was after serious two-car crash. MUST CREDIT [the television of a person involved in a fatal car accident, seriously injured, station] NewsSource: [the television station].” and in a crash site which police had apparently taken steps to cordon off from the public. Given these factors, the Council The Council asked the publication to comment on whether concludes that the publication failed to take reasonable the material breached its Standards of Practice, in particular, steps to avoid breaching the injured person’s reasonable whether the publication took reasonable steps to ensure it expectations of privacy. avoided breaching a person’s reasonable expectations of privacy (General Principle 5) and causing or contributing Considering the nature of the image, in which a person is materially to substantial offence, distress or prejudice or risk shown amongst the wreckage of a car accident with the to health or safety (General Principle 6), unless doing so is caption referring to the “[f]atal crash”, and the rapid timing of sufficiently in the public interest. its publication, the Council also concludes that the publication did not take reasonable steps to ensure the material avoided The publication said the image was taken in a public place, causing or contributing materially to substantial distress. from a helicopter at least 30 metres above the scene, and that at such a distance, the person in the image was not readily The Council recognises the reporting of road accidents is identifiable. It said the article identified the person as a woman commonplace and is often in the public interest, particularly to though it was not possible from the image to identify her ensure readers have access to reliable information on driving gender, age, ethnicity or any distinguishable features of her conditions and matters of road safety. However, the magnitude face or hair. It said there was no blood shown or visible signs of the accident and resulting traffic disruption could have of injury. It said the image demonstrated the admirable efforts been captured visually without showing the injured person, of rescue personnel and their difficult task of freeing the for instance, with a long shot of the scene of the accident. In person, as well as the magnitude of the accident. the circumstances, there was no sufficient justification in the public interest for publishing the image in the manner it did. The publication said the image was published for only Accordingly, the publication breached General Principles approximately an hour and it received only one complaint, to 5 and 6. which it responded by removing the image. It said it is regular and longstanding journalistic practice to publish images of

53 Full Adjudications

Complainant/Manningham Leader for, letters to the editor, although its letters page on its website states that it reserves the right to edit letters.

Adjudication 1724 (November 2017) The publication said the email was not marked “not for The Press Council considered a complaint about material publication”, there was no indication the complainant did published as a letter to the editor in the Manningham not want her name to be used or did not intend the email for Leader in print on 15 May 2017, headed “LETTER OF THE anyone other than the publication, and it had no reason to WEEK: Get more buses on roads”. believe the complainant did not want her letter published. It said the complainant would have been aware it is a publication An article in the publication concerning the Victorian that publishes letters and comments submitted to it, and Government’s bus services concluded: “Now we have to make that it aims to give a voice to people by publishing views and sure Spring St hears the message, so tell us what you think. opinions from the public so decision makers can become Email, write letters or comment on our Facebook page. And aware of public sentiment; to just pass on a batch of submitted we’ll tell the Government. Loud and clear. And for free.” These letters to the government would be futile. The publication said statements were followed by the publication’s email address, the original article’s call for letters followed the form and spirit Facebook page, and postal address. of the words it has used for decades.

The complainant said in response to the article, she emailed The publication said the published letter includes the the publication with details about her experience using the complainant’s name and details of her commute, and this is bus services, believing that the publication was conducting a not sufficient information to allow anyone to determine her petition and would pass on her comments to the government. residential address. It said that it acted in good faith, there had The complainant said the article did not indicate that her been a misunderstanding, it had no intention of upsetting the response would be published, and implied the comments complainant and it apologised to her for publishing the letter. received by the publication would be collected and provided to the government in an effort to lobby on the community’s CONCLUSiON behalf. The Council’s Standards of Practice require publications The complainant said her email was published as a letter to to take reasonable steps to avoid intruding on a person’s the editor without notice or consent, and provided her first reasonable expectation of privacy (General Principle 5), and last name, details of her daily commute, and the suburb or publishing material gathered by unfair means (General in which she lives. The complainant said consent should not Principle 7) – unless doing so is sufficiently in the public simply be inferred from her contacting the publication. She interest. said she takes great care to maintain her privacy, and this The Council notes that the publication did not provide an has been compromised by the publication of these details, email address designated for letters to the editor and the particularly given her distinct surname. She said she would complainant did not submit her email to such an address. have expected the publication to contact her and seek Had it been submitted to such an address, it would have been consent for her comments to be published, especially as her clearer how her comments could be expected to be used. comments were made a more prominent “letter of the week” Furthermore, the complainant was responding to a general and were edited without her consent. call for comment, and did not mark her email as a The publication said the complainant made contact via its letter to the editor. email address in response to a campaign and that most The Council considers that the complainant had a reasonable letters to the editor are received and published in this way. expectation that the comments contained in her email would The publication said it receives all correspondence through its not be published without her prior consent. The publication general email address, and a reporter and its editor determine could have contacted her before publication and checked the whether each item is a letter to the editor or some other email was submitted as a letter to the editor but did not do so. material. Given this, the Council concludes that the publication did not The publication said it was not its usual practice to contact take reasonable steps to avoid intruding on the complainant’s letter writers to confirm their identity or consent to publish, reasonable expectations of privacy, and there was no public unless there were concerning content or legal issues. It said it interest justifying doing so, in particular, publishing the email does not have a published policy on, or specific email address without the complainant being notified and giving consent.

54 2017–2018

Accordingly, the publication breached General Principle 5. Principle 3), and avoided contributing materially to substantial offence, distress or prejudice, without sufficient justification in The Council also considers the call for comment in the original the public interest (General Principle 6). article was not published with an intention to unfairly gather letters from readers or to deceive. Although the publication The publication said it was not misleading, unfair or prejudicial could have contacted the complainant before publication to refer to “foreign-born criminals” as “fake refugee[s]”. The to check the basis on which the letter was submitted, the publication said the opinion piece commented on decisions by Council accepts the email was received and published under the AAT to overrule the Minister’s attempts to “eject 81 foreign- a belief that it was submitted for publication in response to an born criminals by revoking their visas”, which it described as a invitation for comment. Given this, the Council concludes the “troubling twist”. The publication said the term “fake refugee” publication took reasonable steps to avoid publishing material was not used in the legal sense of “refugee” but rather in the gathered by deceptive or unfair means. Accordingly, the sense that the tribunal has allowed people, whom the columnist publication did not breach General Principle 7. believes ought be deported, to enjoy the shelter that Australia provides them. It said the term was used in the context of the Complainant/The Courier-Mail preceding week’s news in which many references were made by the Minister to refer to a group of people not granted refugee Adjudication 1723 (December 2017) status in Australia. It said in that context, reasonable readers would understand that “fake refugee[s]” are not technically The Press Council considered whether its Standards of refugees. Practice were breached by an article in The Courier-Mail on 27 May 2017, headed “FAKE REFUGEE OUTRAGE: CONCLUSION Rapists, a hitman, and ice dealers allowed to stay” in print The Council considers that the print headline’s reference to and “Opinion: Administrative Appeals Tribunal has gone “fake refugee” – as distinct from the online headline’s reference too far by allowing foreign-born criminals to stay” online. to “foreign-born criminals” – had the potential to mislead readers by conflating two distinct concepts when most of the The article commented on decisions made by the cited cases concerned legal immigrants from countries such as Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) and began: “THERE was Scotland who would be ineligible for refugee status in Australia. a troubling twist in the fake refugee controversy this week. Out of the blue we learned that murderers, rapists, pedophiles, The article drew together various issues that had recently armed robbers and ice dealers were among the scores of received media coverage, including the Minister’s description criminals who should have been booted out of the country but of asylum seekers awaiting government advice on how were allowed to stay. They were saved from deportation by their claims would be processed as “fake refugees” and the the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The tribunal overruled Minister’s criticism of the AAT for overturning some of his the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, Peter decisions to rescind the visas of immigrants on the basis of Dutton, who attempted to eject 81 foreign-born criminals by their convictions for criminal offences. Taking into account the revoking their visas.” The article went on to comment that specific circumstances, the Council considers that readers “The tribunal, to my mind, has usurped the proper functions were unlikely to be misled by the article. Accordingly, the of the democratically elected government”, and mentioned Council concludes that the publication did not breach General several people who were “allowed to stay”, citing their countries Principles 1 or 2. of origin. For the same reasons, the Council is not satisfied the Further on, the article referred to “the Immigration publication failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the opinion Department finding th[at] 20 fake asylum seekers lied on their article was presented with reasonable fairness and balance visa applications by saying they were at risk of being killed or and was not based on significantly inaccurate factual material. persecuted if they returned to their own countries”. Accordingly, the Council concludes the publication did not breach General Principles 3 and 4. Following a complaint, the Council asked the publication to comment on whether it took reasonable steps to ensure that Given the nature of the opinion article, that it drew together referring to “foreign-born criminals” as “fake refugee[s]” views held by the columnist on various issues, and the Minister was not inaccurate or misleading (General Principle 1), was having recently used the phrase “fake refugee”, the Council presented with reasonable fairness and balance (General is not satisfied, on balance, that the publication failed to take

55 Full Adjudications

reasonable steps to ensure the article avoided causing or The complainant said the headline “FAT CHANCE OF BEING contributing materially to substantial offence, distress or HEALTHY” and sub-headline “Young Aussies have only prejudice. Accordingly, the publication did not breach General themselves to blame”, followed by the statistic about same- Principle 6. sex attraction in the centre among statistics relating to matters such as obesity and drug use, suggested same-sex The Council notes that there appears to be only one specific attraction is unhealthy and warrants blame. The complainant instance in the article of the term “fake refugee’” being applied said this association between ill health and sexual orientation to a person who made a false claim about the risks from was inaccurate, unfair and significantly harmful. deportation to his country of origin, the rest of the examples mentioned being people from countries ineligible for refugee The complainant said any notion that sexual identity, in status. To avoid diminishing the integrity of the national debate whatever form it takes, is either a choice or a medical concerning asylum seekers and refugees, care ought be problem is false, and coverage like this contributes to health taken to avoid applying the label “fake refugee” to individuals concerns such as increased suicide risk for young same-sex- who have never sought or gained asylum, and to ensure that attracted people. where such a term is used in the public sphere, it is accurately The publication said the graphic was composed by someone attributed to its source. other than the person who composed the headline and was placed on the page just before deadline. If it were to publish The Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy the article again, the publication said it would not have run Association of Australasia/The Daily Telegraph the headline and graphic together. Adjudication 1727 (December 2017) However, it said the article, including the statistics in the graphic, were gathered from the NSW report referred to in The Press Council considered a complaint from The the article – the Youth Health Framework 2017-2024 – which Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Association of Australasia noted the per centage of reported same-sex attraction, that about an article published in The Daily Telegraph on 12 LGBTI young people are at a higher risk of poorer mental July 2017, headed “FAT CHANCE OF BEING HEALTHY: health, and that sexuality is one of the demographic factors Young Aussies have only themselves to blame” in print and which may impact how young people approach and manage “Junk food, alcohol and drugs are fuelling health crisis in their health. young adults” online. It said the article did not link the issue of sexual identity to ill The print article included a graphic below the headline health. The headline, which focused on diet and obesity, was featuring the following statistics: “1/3 of Australia’s young not intended to refer to the non-diet issues in the graphic people live in New South Wales”; “37% of 16-to-24-year-olds and should be read with the article. It said the graphic was consume alcohol at levels posing a lifetime risk to health”; designed to mirror the statistics in the article and not to “12.2% of 16-to-24-year-old males, 21.6 per cent of females single out sexuality as an aspect of ill health, pointing out the experiencing high or very high psychological distress”; “16.8% other non-diet related statistic in the graphic, which referred of secondary school students in Australia are attracted to to one third of Australia’s young people being in NSW. people of the same sex as them or to both sexes”; “11% of 12-to-17-year-olds used illicit drugs in the past 12 months”; In response to criticism of the article, its editor promptly “37% of males and 21 per cent of females aged 16 to 24 are issued a statement via social media, which said the overweight or obese”; “30% of 18-to-24-year-olds used illicit presentation of the article had unfortunately been drugs in the past 12 months”; and “Cannabis most used misinterpreted, that the article in no way suggested or illicit drug”. intended to suggest that same-sex relationships are unhealthy, and there was no judgement expressed in the The article referred to “[t]he worrying findings … contained article other than relating to diet. in a new wide-ranging report that reveals the true state of the health of NSW’s young people, covering everything from CONCLUSION sexuality to obesity”. Further on, the article repeated that The Council’s Standards of Practice require that publications “Sexuality was also canvassed, with 16.8 per cent of secondary take reasonable steps to ensure that factual material is school students in Australia reporting they are attracted to accurate and not misleading (General Principle 1) and people of the same sex or to both sexes.”

56 2017–2018

presented with reasonable fairness and balance (General Accordingly, the publication breached General Principle 6. Principle 3). If the material is significantly inaccurate or Given its conclusions on other aspects of the complaint, the misleading, or not reasonably fair and balanced, publications Council considers it unnecessary to reach conclusions in must take reasonable steps to provide adequate remedial relation to General Principles 3 and 4. action or an opportunity for a response to be published (General Principles 2 and 4). Joan Falconio/NT News The Standards of Practice also require that publications take reasonable steps to avoid causing or contributing materially to Adjudication 1733 (February 2018) substantial offence, distress or prejudice, or to a substantial The Press Council considered a complaint about a risk to health or safety, unless doing so is sufficiently in the front page article in NT News on 20 April 2017 in print, public interest (General Principle 6). headed “FALCONIO ‘CUT UP, DUMPED’”, with a large photograph of “Slain British backpacker Peter Falconio The print headline appeared as part of the graphic with a with … girlfriend Joanne Lees.” Above the headline was similar coloured design and background that distinguished it a sub-headline, which read: “Police investigating shock from the rest of the article below the graphic. Given this, the new claims murdered backpacker’s missing body was Council does not accept that the headline should be read as transported across three states.” The full report was on distinct from the graphic. pages six and seven, headed “Falconio ‘cut and dumped’: The Council also considers that there is a significant difference letter.” The article was also published online, headed between reporting on same-sex attraction as a demographic “NT Police investigating claims by letter writer that Peter factor which may affect young people’s mental health, as Falconio’s body was ‘cut up and dumped”. referred to in the NSW Youth Health Framework, and reporting The article concerned an anonymous letter received by the it as a lifestyle-related health factor such as poor diet and publication, which reportedly contained “compelling new claims drug use. surrounding the whereabouts of … Peter Falconio’s body”. It The Council concludes that the headline “FAT CHANCE OF reported the anonymous letter writer claimed to have been BEING HEALTHY” and sub-headline “Young Aussies have informed by an associate of Bradley John Murdoch, the man only themselves to blame” with the statistic that “16.8% of convicted of Mr Falconio’s murder, that he assisted in disposing secondary school students are attracted to people of the of Mr Falconio’s body. The article described in detail the letter’s same sex or to both sexes” associated the students reporting claims about how Mr Murdoch wanted Mr Falconio’s body same-sex attraction with people affected by unhealthy lifestyle disposed of and its treatment during this disposal, including factors. In such circumstances, the presentation of the article how the associate buried Mr Falconio. It also included a vague was significantly misleading. Accordingly, the publication description of the place where the body was allegedly buried. breached General Principle 1. The complainant, the mother of Peter Falconio, said the article The Council notes the publication’s public response online to was published without any regard to the likely distress it would complaints from the public. However, this public statement cause her and her family, and which was substantially felt both was not published in print and did not acknowledge or emotionally and physically. She said anyone can send a letter apologise for the misleading nature of the graphic. Rather, it anonymously to newspapers about anything, fact or fiction, and attributed the impression to readers having misconstrued the given this and the distressing nature of the unsubstantiated article. Given this, this response did not constitute adequate content, the publication should have simply referred the letter remedial action and accordingly, the publication also breached to the police; it was not in the public interest to publish the General Principle 2. anonymous letter.

The Council concludes that the reference to ill health and The publication said the disappearance of Mr Falconio and blame in the headlines, with the statistic about same-sex the conviction of Mr Murdoch for his murder are matters of attraction displayed among factors such as obesity and public record and of major public interest. It said the most drug use, suggested same-sex attraction is unhealthy and pertinent outstanding issue from the crime and Mr Murdoch’s blameworthy. As a result, the article caused substantial conviction is what happened to Mr Falconio’s body, and the offence, distress, prejudice and risk to public health and letter contained new allegations related to this specific point. safety, and there was no public interest justifying this. It said prior to publication it presented the letter to a most

57 Full Adjudications

senior officer in the Northern Territory Police Force who said Complainant/news.com.au the letter may be authentic, and police confirmed in a public statement that they were – and still are – investigating the Adjudication 1732 (February 2018) letter and its claims. It said it also made some enquiries before the article was published. It said it delayed publication The Press Council considered whether its Standards of of the story to allow police to first contact the complainant’s Practice were breached by an article published in news. family and make it aware of the letter. Police made that contact. com.au on 31 May 2017, headed “Islamic State [IS] terror guide encourages luring victims via Gumtree, eBay”. The publication acknowledged and apologised for the distress the article caused the complainant and her family. It said given The opening paragraph read: “ISLAMIC State has released the significant coverage of the murder over the years and the a step-by-step guide on how to murder nonbelievers, which lapse of time, it was of the view that the presentation given to includes how to lure targets via fake on Gumtree and the story at the time was appropriate. eBay.” The article proceeded to relay in detail how an article in “[t]he latest edition of the terror group’s English-language CONCLUSION propaganda magazine … encourages would-be terrorists to The Council’s Standards of Practice applicable in this matter advertise products on second-hand selling sites … to lure require publications to take reasonable steps to ensure factual victims and assassinate them”. The article mostly comprised material is accurate and not misleading (General Principle 1) extracts from the source material describing the steps one and presented with reasonable fairness and balance, and that would take to perform such acts. writers’ expressions of opinion are not based on significantly The Council asked the publication to comment on whether inaccurate factual material or an omission of key facts the material breached its Standards of Practice, in particular, (General Principle 3). The Standards of Practice also require whether the publication took reasonable steps to ensure that publications take reasonable steps to avoid causing or it avoided causing or contributing materially to substantial contributing materially to substantial offence, distress or offence, distress or prejudice or risk to public health or safety, prejudice, or to a substantial risk to health or safety, unless unless doing so is sufficiently in the public interest (General doing so is sufficiently in the public interest (General Principle 6). Principle 6). The publication said the article was published with the intent The Council accepts that the publication sought confirmation from police that the letter’s claims had a sufficient degree of of providing readers with an insight into how IS operates. It credibility and that it did undertake some, albeit inconclusive, said it has, along with other publishers, published countless enquiries concerning the veracity of the letter writer’s claims. stories about the workings of IS and their strategies since they On the information available, the Council is not satisfied the rose to prominence and there was no intention to encourage publication failed to take reasonable steps to present the letter terrorism or support for IS, but rather to discourage it. with accuracy, fairness and balance. Accordingly, it did not The publication said shortly after the article was published, breach General Principles 1 and 3. a federal government department notified it that the However, given the article’s prominent and graphic description Classification Board designated the material Refused of the alleged treatment of Mr Falconio’s body after his Classification (banned content). The Board was of the opinion murder, especially in the headlines, the Council considers that that notwithstanding being a news article, the limited author the publication failed to take reasonable steps to avoid causing text and overwhelming reliance on detailed references substantial offence and distress to the complainant’s family. and substantial verbatim quotations from the terrorist The Council accepts there is a public interest in reporting propaganda magazine indirectly provided instruction on the of the crime, however in this instance – particularly one doing of a terrorist act, pursuant to section 9A (2)(b) of the concerning anonymous and unverified allegations – this did Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) not justify such detailed and graphic descriptions. Accordingly, Act 1995. The publication said after receiving this notice, it the publication breached General Principle 6. immediately removed the article and any associated traces from its website, and alerted staff to the decision and relevant legislative section, about which it was not aware. It said the effect of the Board’s decision was to provide a legal direction for the publication to remove the material, without affording it

58 2017–2018

an opportunity to defend the article on public interest grounds. The article concerned a man who was “reported missing” and later “found by State Emergency Service (SES) volunteers in The publication ultimately said that it took reasonable steps dense bushland … having spent the night at the location”. It to ensure the published material did not cause a substantial reported the publication understood that “the man inflicted risk to public safety and nonetheless, it was justified in the self-harm in an apparent suicide attempt and at some point public interest. It said the impetus for the article was to advise fell from a height after wandering into the bush …” The readers that IS was trying to infiltrate Australia using everyday publication further reported he had “told his partner on Friday networks. The public interest pertained to public safety and morning he was leaving for work as usual but he failed to national security, preventing crime, and the legitimate right show up, with work colleagues and his partner becoming of an independent media to provide the public with reliable concerned for his welfare when he was uncontactable during information particularly on situations which could put them the morning and around lunchtime”. It then reported that his at risk of attack. It said there is actually greater risk to public “condition was unknown at the time of printing and family safety from the public not knowing the intentions and members declined to comment”. strategies of IS to target Australians for attacks. The rest of the article questioned whether the incident was CONCLUSION associated with the man’s employment and whether “[his] The Press Council considers that the article did publish behaviour may have been prompted by work-related stress much of the source material from IS verbatim, with limited stemming from the current workplace culture …” author input and accompanying analysis or context, such The complainant, the daughter of the man, said the article as comments from experts and websites such as Gumtree. was inaccurate or misleading in reporting that “the man told The Council accepts there was no intention to encourage or his partner on Friday morning he was leaving for work as support terrorism, but considers that republishing content from usual” as this did not happen and no member of the family told terrorist entities in this manner can perpetuate the purpose of anyone this. Moreover, the complainant said the implication such propaganda and give publicity to its ideas and practices. that workplace issues were the cause of the incident was However, the Council accepts the public interest in alerting inaccurate and that other issues were involved. readers to potential risks to their safety. The Council considers The complainant said her sister, also the man’s daughter, was that on balance, the public interest in alerting readers to contacted by the publication prior to publication of the article the dangerous content of the terrorist propaganda and its and she specifically said she did not want any article published instructional detail was greater than the risk to their safety or any details or personal information to be reported. She posed by the publication’s effective republication of terrorist said the publication published an article against their express propaganda content. Given this, the Council concludes that the wishes and included personal information such as her father’s public interest justified publication of the article. Accordingly, suburb of residence and where the incident happened, as the publication did not breach General Principle 6. well as where he worked. She said even though his name The Council notes that great care needs to be exercised by was not mentioned, her father was effectively identified in the publications when reporting on terrorist propaganda to ensure small community and those who did not know it was a suicide that public safety is not compromised. In particular, effectively attempt now would. republishing source material comprising instructional detail in The publication said the article was at least the fourth in a how to carry out particular terrorist acts could pose a risk to series reporting on detailed accounts from family members public safety, and reasonable steps should be taken to prevent of both past and present employees of the same employer such an outcome. about mental health concerns associated with bullying and intimidation. The publication said it was very familiar Complainant/Southern Free Times with reporting on mental health concerns associated with employment stress. It said it was alerted to this instance by a Adjudication 1734 (March 2018) family member of another colleague with the same employer, The Press Council considered whether its Standards of and confirmed the details reported with other reliable sources, Practice were breached by a print article published in the including the man’s colleagues as well as members of the Southern Free Times headed “Very near tragedy” on search party who said the man himself had associated the 23 March 2017. incident with work.

59 Full Adjudications

It said it exercised discretion and sensitivity in omitting from in reporting on suicide, and in this instance accepts that the the article the man’s name, as requested by his daughter, as publication was well-intentioned. well as further details it had. It also did not publish the article However, as the complainant’s sister expressly asked the on the front page or online in order to minimise the impact publication not to report on the incident, there was no of the story on the family and avoid online and social media clear and informed consent from the man’s family. In these commentary and speculation. However, it accepted that, in circumstances, the public interest had to be strong enough hindsight, the reference to the man inflicting self-harm could to report the incident as a suicide attempt notwithstanding have been worded more appropriately given the potential the lack of consent. The Council considers the public interest impact on his family. here did not extend to reporting on this individual instance It said it stood by the decision to publish the article, given in as explicit a manner as occurred. Accordingly, the Council the significant public interest involved. The article followed concludes that the publication breached Suicide Standard 3 in previous stories and previous allegations about serious and this respect. widespread mistreatment at the same place of employment. The Council notes that the publication did not identify the Its motivation was to expose this and pressure the employer to man, at least not by name, and accepts that the publication change its management practices, as well as to acknowledge complied with the complainant’s sister’s request in this respect. the newsworthiness of the search itself, which involved many Accordingly, the Council concludes that the publication did not people who put their own safety at risk. It said the feedback breach Suicide Standard 4. it has received since publication of the series of articles, especially from family members of employees of the same The Council also considers that the publication did not employer, has been overwhelmingly positive and encouraging. sensationalise, glamorise, trivialise or stigmatise suicide in the article. Accordingly, the Council concludes that the publication CONCLUSION did not breach Suicide Standard 6. Nor was the article The Council’s Standards of Practice require that publications published with undue prominence or unnecessarily explicit take reasonable steps to ensure that factual material is headlines or images, but rather the publication exercised accurate and not misleading and is distinguishable from other sensitivity and moderation in electing not to report on the material such as opinion (General Principle 1) and to provide incident on the front page or online. Accordingly, the Council corrective remedial action if published material is significantly concludes that the publication did not breach Suicide inaccurate or misleading (General Principle 2), avoid intruding Standard 7. on a person’s reasonable expectations of privacy (General Given its conclusions on other aspects of the complaint, the Principle 5) or causing or contributing materially to substantial Council considers it unnecessary to reach conclusions in offence, distress or prejudice, or a substantial risk to health or relation to General Principles 1, 2, 5 and 6. safety (General Principle 6)—unless doing so is sufficiently in Note: If you or someone close to you requires personal the public interest. assistance, please contact Lifeline Australia on 13 11 14. In addition, Specific Standards on the Coverage of Suicide 3 and 4 require that in deciding whether to report a suicide— Bob Brown/The Daily Telegraph which includes apparent suicide attempts—and disclose the name of the person, consideration should be given to whether Adjudication 1735 (March 2018) clear and informed consent has been provided by appropriate The Press Council considered a complaint by Bob Brown relatives or close friends, and whether such reporting is about two articles published on 17 March 2017 in The Daily clearly in the public interest. Further, Suicide Standard 6 Telegraph. The first article was headed “TRIGGS’ GIG FOR requires that reports should not sensationalise, glamorise, GREENS” on the front page, and continued on page four trivialise or stigmatise suicides, and Suicide Standard 7 headed “Human rights chief not partial to impartiality”. requires that reports of suicide should not be given undue The second article, on page 13, was headed “TRIGG- prominence and great care should be taken to avoid causing HUGGER: HUMAN RIGHTS CHIEF A GREENIE DISGRACE”, unnecessary harm or hurt to people who have been affected by also published online headed “Sharri Markson: Gillian suicide, which requires special sensitivity and moderation in Triggs has revealed her true colour … and it’s green”. That both news gathering and reporting. opinion article was followed with an editorial on page 64, The Council recognises there can be substantial public benefit headed “Forget politics and concentrate on job”.

60 2017–2018

The first article began: “AUSTRALIA’S Human Rights on Professor Triggs’ “gig” for a foundation which regularly Commission chief Gillian Triggs is under pressure to step supports “green” causes and is headed by the Greens’ former down after agreeing to headline a fundraiser for ex-Greens leader. The publication said the first two paragraphs of the leader Bob Brown.” It reported that “Mr Brown was arrested article make this clear. last year in an anti-logging protest and the [Bob Brown Second, the publication said it was not misleading or unfair Foundation] regularly issues press releases advocating its to describe the event as a “fundraiser” in the opening pro-forestry and anti-mining stance.” The second article paragraph. The publication said the money raised from tickets included a large cartoon depicting Professor Triggs hugging for the event went in the first instance to the complainant’s the complainant depicted as a tree. It repeated that the Foundation and Professor Triggs (whose comments were complainant “was arrested for a logging protest and was included in the article) had said if there were extra funds after escorted by police away from a Tasmanian forest”. covering costs these would go to a charity. The complainant said the articles are inaccurate, misleading, Third, the publication said the reference to the complainant’s unfair and unbalanced in a number of key respects. First, the arrest was to demonstrate that he remained a green activist. It complainant said the headline “TRIGGS’ GIG FOR GREENS” said the article did not state that he was charged and it did not would have misled a reasonable reader to believe the event need to as it had previously reported on these charges being was a fundraiser for the Australian Greens political party when dropped. it had no such purpose. Fourth, the publication said the focus of the articles was on Second, the complainant said the “gig” referred to was not Professor Triggs and not the complainant, and there was a fundraiser for the Bob Brown Foundation but an event no suggestion he had done anything wrong or improper. It organised by the Foundation to provide Tasmanians with said following publication of the articles, it contacted the annual orations by significant speakers. He said the event complainant concerning a potential follow-up piece and put has regularly run at a loss and profits, if any, were donated to detailed questions to him, which he refused to answer. charity. The complainant said the editorial admitted this in its concluding paragraph: “For her part Triggs asserts that the In relation to the “pro-forestry” comment, it said the use of the event is not political, nor is it a fundraiser. Technically true, term meant to convey that the complainant and his Foundation perhaps, but given her history in the office, not a good look support the preservation of forests, and any reasonable reader either.” would understand it this way.

Third, the complainant said the articles referred to the fact he CONCLUSION had been arrested in 2016 for participating in a protest, but The Council’s Standards of Practice applicable in this unfairly omitted that all charges were later dropped (and that matter require that publications take reasonable steps to the laws were being challenged, later successfully). He said ensure factual material is accurate and not misleading, this fostered a false impression that he had broken the law. distinguishable from other material such as opinion (General The complainant also said the article inaccurately refers to the Principle 1), is presented with reasonable fairness and Foundation as “pro-forestry” although it seeks to end logging balance, and that writers’ expressions of opinion are not based of native forests. on significantly inaccurate factual material or an omission of Fourth, the complainant said although he is prominently key facts (General Principle 3). If the material is significantly referred to in both articles, as well as the accompanying inaccurate or misleading, or unfair or unbalanced, publications editorial, and depicted in a prominent cartoon with Professor must take reasonable steps to provide adequate remedial Triggs, he was not contacted by the publication for comment. action or an opportunity for a response to be published He said he was subsequently contacted after publication of (General Principles 2 and 4). the article with a list of emailed questions and he offered the The Council considers the headline “TRIGGS’ GIG FOR publication a telephone interview instead, to which it did not GREENS” is misleading in implying that the event attended respond. by Professor Triggs was for the Greens party and not for the The publication responded that the headline “TRIGGS’ GIG FOR Bob Brown Foundation. The first article’s statement that the GREENS” did not state the gig was for the Australian Greens event was “tied to the Greens party” and the second article’s party, nor does the article. It said the headline is accurate reference to the “Green-aligned event”, together with the and reasonably reflects the context of the article, focusing repeated description of the event as a “fundraiser”, was likely

61 Full Adjudications

to lead readers to understand that it was a Greens event. temporary ban on imported prawns had led to a price rise that The Council also considers that referring to the event as a was being passed onto customers.” fundraiser as opposed to an oration was inaccurate. Whether The article reported the contents of a notice posted at the or not there was any profit from the event, its purpose was not complainant’s restaurant that said: “A temporary ban on to raise funds but to cover the costs of the event. Based on imported raw prawns by the Agriculture Minister has forced the information provided, the Council accepts there had been suppliers to significantly increase the cost of prawns … limited if any surplus in the event’s history. In reporting these Unfortunately we have had to temporarily pass this increase matters in the manner it did, the publication failed to take on by surcharging prawn dishes by $2.00. This is a temporary reasonable steps to ensure the article was accurate and not measure and will be reversed as soon as possible.” The article misleading. Accordingly, it breached General Principle 1. concluded by stating that the publication “contacted Thai Having been alerted to these significantly misleading aspects, Terrace but has yet to receive a response”. the publication did not publish a clarification or any corrective The complainant said the article’s statement that the remedial action. Accordingly, it breached General Principle 2. publication was yet to receive a response was inaccurate. The The Council considers the repeated reference to the complainant said the only enquiry received was through an complainant being arrested, without also reporting what online booking form completed by the journalist the day before came of this, was unfair by omission. Although the Council publication, using a personal email address, which asked accepts the publication previously reported that charges were “[d]o you charge extra for prawns? If so, why?” in the special dropped, this was many months before and did not outweigh requests section of the form. The complainant said it replied the unfairness of the repeated reference and omission in to the question by email that day but, had it known the enquiry this instance. The Council also considers that the publication came from a journalist, it would have provided a more detailed ought to have also contacted the complainant for comment. answer. Given the above factors, the publication, in not affording the The complainant said the journalist dined at the restaurant on complainant a right of reply prior to publication, failed to take the night before publication and at that time did not make any reasonable steps to ensure the article was presented with enquiries of staff and did not identify herself as a journalist. reasonable fairness and balance. Accordingly, it breached The complainant said it received no call or voicemail message General Principle 3. from the journalist and believed she had been deceptive and The Council does not accept that the complainant refused to unfair in her enquiries. answer the publication’s questions for a potential follow-up article. Based on the information provided, the complainant The complainant said that following the article it emailed the reasonably responded to the publication’s list of questions by publication explaining it did not source its prawns from the asking to be interviewed, which was not followed up. In not area within which prawns caught were banned from export. providing a fair opportunity for subsequent publication of a Instead, it sourced prawns through its usual supplier who “had reply, the publication also breached General Principle 4. increased the price of prawns from $19/kg to $27/kg, a 42% increase”. The complainant said that in order to continue to Thai Terrace/The Courier-Mail provide prawns on its menu it would “pass on an increase of $2/dish, an 8% increase in price”. It emailed the publication to Adjudication 1731 (April 2018) follow up but did not receive a response.

The Press Council considered a complaint from Thai The complainant said the article’s implication that it was Terrace Rosalie about an article published online in The unduly profiting from the outbreak of white spot disease and Courier-Mail on 20 April 2017, headed “Prawn prices in taking advantage of its patrons was misleading and unfair. It Queensland rise in restaurants despite fishermen cutting said the publication of the article damaged its reputation and prices”. the publication’s proposal to later include its comments in the story did not remedy its concerns. The article reported that as a result of “a ban on exporting locally caught prawns due to an outbreak of white spot disease The publication said the journalist attempted to contact the in Queensland”, local fishermen “have been forced to slash complainant by telephone several times over several days their prices”. It said “despite a glut of prawns on the local prior to publication but those calls were not answered. No market” Thai Terrace Rosalie advised “customers that the message was left on the complainant’s voicemail system.

62 2017–2018

The publication said its use of the online booking form was restaurant to those of local fishermen and, given this, did not a last resort and the use of the journalist’s personal email in present the material with reasonable fairness and balance. that form was inadvertent. Accordingly, the publication breached General Principle 3.

The publication said the article was accurate and only As to remedial action, the Council acknowledges the included information available in the notice distributed by publication offered to update the article with the complainant’s the complainant to its customers. In any event, it stated the comments. However, the Council does not consider that response provided to the journalist’s online booking form did inclusion of the complainant’s comments would adequately not provide any further information. remedy the overall misleading and unfair nature of the article. The publication did not correct the inaccuracy, that it had not It said by including the text of the restaurant’s notice, the yet received a response from the complainant. Further, given it article accurately and fairly explained the surcharge was due failed to respond to the complainant’s two attempts to resolve to a temporary ban on imported raw prawns, forcing suppliers the matter directly, the Council considers the publication did to significantly increase the cost of prawns. not take reasonable steps to provide a fair opportunity for The publication offered to amend the article to include the publication of a reply. Accordingly, the publication breached complainant’s comments. both General Principles 2 and 4.

CONCLUSION The Council acknowledges it is best practice for journalists to identify themselves when seeking comment for publication, The Council’s Standards of Practice applicable in this matter which did not occur in this case. However, the information require publications to take reasonable steps to ensure factual provided in the article was publicly available and, as such, no material is accurate and not misleading (General Principle 1) published material had been gathered by deceptive or unfair and presented with reasonable fairness and balance (General means. Accordingly, the publication did not breach General Principle 3). If the material is significantly inaccurate or Principle 7. misleading, or refers adversely to a person, publications must take reasonable steps to provide adequate remedial action Complainant/The Sunday Telegraph or an opportunity for a response to be published (General Principles 2 and 4). The Council’s Standards of Practice Adjudication 1738 (May 2018) also require publications to take reasonable steps to avoid The Press Council considered whether its Standards publishing material gathered by unfair means – unless doing of Practice were breached by an article in The Sunday so is sufficiently in the public interest (General Principle 7). Telegraph on 30 April 2017, headed “What genius gave The Council considers that at the time of the article, the this Islam idiot a soapbox” in print and with a similar publication had received a response to its question in the headline online. The print article appeared on a page booking form. Given this, the article’s statement that the headed “OPINION: YOURS AND OURS”. publication had yet to receive a response was inaccurate. The article attacked “the failed concept of multiculturalism” The Council also considers the article’s statements that prawn and those who have “fallen over themselves to promote prices were rising in restaurants “despite a glut of prawns multiculturalism”. In that context, it focused on Yassmin on the local market” and “despite fishermen cutting prices”, Abdel-Magied, a Muslim woman, referring to her did imply the complainant was unduly profiting from the being promoted and self-promoted as an exponent of situation. The Council accepts this implies the complainant multiculturalism. sourced its prawns from the locality affected by the export It referred to Ms Abdel-Magied as a “silly Muslim woman” in ban, at a reduced price, when this was not the case. Given this, the opening sentence, and further on as “stupid”, someone the article was also misleading. Accordingly, the publication who “was always bound to utter great inanities”, “a fool”, breached General Principle 1. “non-entity” and “halfwit”. The article referred to some of Ms In addition to this, the article omitted that the ban on importing Abdel-Magied’s public comments, including “her ridiculous prawns to Australia had actually increased the price of prawns (and extremely offensive) Facebook remarks about Anzac Day” in Australia generally, in line with the surcharge put in place by and earlier, her “proclaim[ing] to great hilarity that Islam was the complainant. In omitting any reference to this, the article ‘the most feminist religion’”. It made reference to her “part- unfairly compared the prawn prices at the complainant’s time job as an ABC presenter” and position “on the Council

63 Full Adjudications

for Australian-Arab Relations, one of the little perks run by … Accordingly, the Council considers that there has been no the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade”, and questioned: breach of its Standards of Practice. “Is the government, is the ABC, really so blind to the flaws in multiculturalism that they seek out individuals who appear to Chrissie Swan / Woman’s Day demonstrate that they grotesquely misunderstand the nature of the nation?” The article concluded: “Don’t deny nonentities Adjudication 1718 (May 2018) their right to freedom of speech but at least deprive them of The Press Council considered a complaint by Chrissie having a hand in the public pocket while they’re on their silly Swan about an article published by Woman’s Day in print, soap boxes.” headed “It’s McHappy day!”, on 27 March 2017.

Following a complaint, the Council asked the publication to Above the headline, the article featured a large photograph comment on whether, in emphasising Ms Abdel-Magied’s of the complainant walking with her three children caught religion in its criticism of her, it took reasonable steps to unawares by a photographer. It was accompanied by a caption ensure factual material was presented with reasonable which read “STAR SPOTTER Your favourite stars … caught fairness and balance (General Principle 3), and whether more on camera”. Another caption next to the youngest child, generally, in light of the terms applied to Ms Abdel-Magied, it whom it named, said she “leads the way!”, and another much avoided contributing materially to substantial offence, distress smaller caption said “Chrissie’s Nova radio segment was or prejudice, or a substantial risk to health or safety, without just announced Melbourne’s number-one brekkie show.” sufficient justification in the public interest (General Principle Two smaller photographs showed the complainant in a car, 6). apparently in the drive-through of a McDonald’s, one captioned The publication said the content of the article was clearly “Drive-through Maccas is every kid’s dream treat!” The article identified as opinion. The columnist was entitled to express began: “These guys must’ve been doing their chores!” and his opinion of Ms Abdel-Magied and his opinion of her actions. said the complainant treated her children – stating their It said that at the time of publication Ms Abdel-Magied was names and ages – “to a lunch date at McDonald’s”. It noted at the centre of a widespread public debate about comments the complainant had previously expressed a wish to have more she made relating to Anzac Day. Her religion was relevant children. to the content of the article, to her public profile (which The Council’s Standards of Practice require publications emphasised her identity and experiences as a Muslim woman to take reasonable steps to avoid intruding on a person’s in Australia) and to her position on the publicly-funded Council reasonable expectations of privacy (General Principle 5) or for Australian-Arab Relations. It said it was in the public causing or contributing materially to substantial offence, interest for an opinion article to discuss these realities from distress, prejudice or risk to health or safety (General Principle the columnist’s viewpoint, exercising his freedom of speech, 6), unless doing so is sufficiently in the public interest. however critical he might be. Ms Swan said her complaint was not about the coverage of CONCLUSION herself but of her young children. The photograph showed them in an unflattering light, one with a pacifier and a security The Council accepts that the article is, in its entirety, an blanket and another with a pacifier. She said the effect of the expression of opinion in relation to multiculturalism and picture was to expose the children to ridicule. The photograph to Ms Abdel-Magied as an exponent and exemplar of had been taken without her knowledge or approval, and the multiculturalism. The article attacked her suitability as a article caused considerable distress to her family, made the proponent of multiculturalism, a concept which it also attacks. children feel unsafe, and exposed them to threats and abuse, As a clear expression of opinion, it does not breach General especially cyberbullying. Principle 3. The opinion expressed is based on explicit and She said that about five years previously she and two of her implied opinions about multiculturalism. children had been photographed on an unpaid basis for an Nor does the article breach General Principle 6. The article published in another magazine, which resulted in columnist’s opinions are likely to offend many. But it is in significant and painful criticism of her and her children. Since the public interest in freedom of speech that vigorous public that time she had taken steps to keep her children out of the debate be permitted, even when expressed in extreme terms, media. She said she engaged in publicity at the behest of her as is the case here. employers, arising from contractual obligations for a television

64 … the article featured a large photograph 2017–2018 of the complainant walking with her three children caught unawares by a photographer.

or radio show she was appearing in, but typically this did not The publication said that on the information available to it at involve her children. Exceptions to this included photographs the time of publication, it believed the complainant chose to of her then newborn baby released to try to contain attention publicise images of her children, including by entering into from photographers, an unpaid photograph she consented to contracts with commercial incentives. It said the complainant for a charity for women, and some footage of her son taken regularly published photographs of her children to social media without her approval when he came to meet her at a television accounts on which she has a significant public following, and production, which the producer agreed to significantly limit for Internet searches revealed multiple posed photographs of the broadcast. complainant and her children. The publication maintained it was reasonable to publish the article at the time; however, it said The complainant said she enters into agreements with it would take into account the complainant’s concerns and the publicists to ensure her children are not photographed or degree to which she has placed her children in the public eye in reported on at events they attend with her. If that agreement any future editorial consideration of images of her children. is not reached, she attends without her children. She said her children do not have any commercial endorsement or CONCLUSION representation arrangements with anyone, are not in the media industry and are not in the public domain or of any The Council notes that the photograph of the complainant and interest to the public. her children was taken without her consent or knowledge. Children have a reasonable expectation of privacy, although Ms Swan said she no longer posts photographs to her social this can be limited in various ways, in particular by what their media accounts that identify her children’s faces, even if only parents do or cause the children to do. Particular care is her “friends” can see them. While images of her children required when publishing material concerning children, given were obtainable via a Google search, these were mostly that children have a limited degree of choice. This will involve unauthorised photographs taken while they were going exercising judgment in individual cases. about their lives. Others were taken from a private Facebook page, which she had since deactivated, or sourced from The Council notes that the complainant (but not her children) is acquaintances. She said some photographs of her children on a celebrity; a public figure with a reduced expectation to privacy. her Instagram account were obscured, showing only part of It accepts that, while the complainant had shared information their faces, and presenting them positively. about her children on radio, in print and on television – and that one of her children made a brief appearance with her on The publication said the article was positive and not a television show – she made efforts in recent years to reduce disparaging, simply depicting an ordinary public outing of the their public exposure, particularly in relation to images which kind enjoyed by many Australian families. It said a significant would identify them. The Council does not consider that the proportion of its editorial content was focused on documenting complainant’s sharing of information about her children in the the lives of celebrities and their families in which the public media – particularly instances where the complainant talked was very interested. The publication said it was aware of solely about her children – resulted in their being able to be the sensitivities associated with images of children and it considered as consistently “in the public eye”. Nor does it refrained from publishing photographs of children who were consider that the comparatively small number of photos of the not “in the public eye”. However, it disputed the complainant’s children on the complainant’s Instagram account lessened their view that she had not placed her children in the public eye in reasonable expectations of privacy. the last five years. It said there were many instances of the complainant having done so, including publishing a memoir The content of the article, except for one small caption, which discussed her children, giving television and magazine concerned the private life of the complainant and her children. interviews and hosting a radio show in which she mentioned On the material available, the Council is satisfied that the level her children, and posting several photographs of her children and nature of engagement with the media by the complainant to Instagram. and her children did not reduce the children’s reasonable expectation of privacy so as to justify the article’s intrusion on It noted that, unlike a number of other celebrities, the that expectation. Although members of the public might have complainant had not contacted it at an earlier stage to seek a found the photographs of interest, the Council considers that general agreement to not publish photographs of her children. their publication was not in the public interest so as to justify It also said that, at the request of the complainant, it did not the level of intrusion. Accordingly, the publication breached publish the article online. General Principle 5.

65 Full Adjudications

The Council considers the article was likely to cause or a mandatory disease notification that made such disclosure substantial distress to the family. In publishing the article in the public interest. She said that as the circumstances of with the unauthorised photograph of the children with their Imogen’s death were rare, reporting on it did not have the pacifiers and a security blanket visiting “Maccas” with the same public interest as more common matters of public accompanying caption “… caught on camera”, the publication health and safety. failed to take reasonable steps to avoid causing substantial The publication said although the print headline could be offence, distress or prejudice. Nor did any public interest misleading, it was qualified by the reference in the opening justify this. Accordingly, the publication breached General sentence that Imogen “may” have caught the disease from her Principle 6. son, which it said was true at the time. It said senior health sources confirmed that because the bacteria can present itself Rachael Petrak/The Sunday Telegraph as a harmless cold, medical authorities were examining the Adjudication 1736 (May 2018) possibility that Imogen’s son may have carried the bacteria and displayed cold-like symptoms, and this might be how Imogen The Press Council considered a complaint from Rachael had contracted the disease. The publication said that having Petrak about an article published in The Sunday confirmed this investigation with a senior health source, it was Telegraph on 30 July 2017, headed “Mum died from her under no legal obligation to seek the consent of the family to toddler’s sickness” in print and “Dead mum Imogen report on the matter. Petrak may have caught pneumococcal disease from her The publication said the pneumococcal bacteria is very child” online. common and is airborne and easy to catch. It said the article The article reported on the death of Imogen Petrak, the concerned serious matters of public safety and health and complainant’s sister-in-law. It began: “A PREGNANT mother it was in the public interest to report. The publication said who was rushed to hospital with an ear infection and later died the issue of vaccinations and the possible health risks of after an emergency Caesarean may have caught the deadly unvaccinated children have been of major public importance pneumococcal disease from her own unvaccinated toddler.” in Australia and the subject of recent federal government Further on, the article stated: “Ms Petrak’s 17-month-old initiatives to encourage parents to vaccinate their children. son … who was not vaccinated, was also unwell in the days CONCLUSION leading up to her death. Tests confirmed the infection was pneumococcal type 19F, which is covered by the pneumococcal The Council’s Standards of Practice applicable in this matter vaccine … The bacteria can spread between people through require publications to take reasonable steps to ensure factual infected droplets in the air and by touching an infected material is accurate and not misleading (General Principle 1) person.” and presented with reasonable fairness and balance (General The complainant said the article was incorrect, as Imogen’s Principle 3). If the material is significantly inaccurate or son was not ill with pneumococcal disease prior to Imogen’s misleading, or refers adversely to a person, publications must death and he was not the cause or likely cause of her death. take reasonable steps to provide adequate remedial action She said that as a result of the article a number of other or an opportunity for a response to be published (General publishers also reported that Imogen’s son may have caused Principles 2 and 4). The Council’s Standards of Practice also her death. This had been distressing to the family. The require publications to take reasonable steps to avoid intruding complainant said Imogen’s son might encounter this article in on a person’s reasonable expectations of privacy (General the future and believe he was responsible for her death, which Principle 5), causing or contributing materially to substantial would be especially distressing. distress (General Principle 6), and publishing material gathered by unfair means (General Principle 7) – unless doing The complainant said information about Imogen’s blood test so is sufficiently in the public interest. results and Imogen’s son’s vaccination status was published without the family’s knowledge or consent. She said the The Council considers the print headline “Mum died from hospital assured the family its staff had not passed this her toddler’s sickness” is presented as a statement of fact information to the publication. She said publishing medical not qualified in any way, and is inaccurate. Although the information relating to Imogen and her son was unethical and publication reportedly relied on a highly-trusted source at the insensitive, and there was no serious threat to public health hospital, given the information was obtained from a single

66 2017–2018

source confidential to the publication and the claim was of Phillip Penfold/The Maitland Mercury a highly speculative nature, the Council concludes that the publication failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the Adjudication 1740 (June 2018) statement that Imogen “may” have caught the disease from her son was accurate and not misleading, and that it did not The Press Council considered a complaint about a letter to present factual material with reasonable fairness and balance. the editor published under the heading “Family Affair” in Based on the material provided, reporting that Ms Petrak’s The Maitland Mercury in print on 8 September 2017. The death resulted from the transmission of pneumococcal letter was published on the day before local government disease from her child was without factual basis. This was elections took place. The letter expressed the writer’s especially so for the print headline, which was not qualified by concern about “instances of more than one nomination the word “may”. Accordingly, the publication breached General from the same family” and referred specifically to the Principles 1 and 3. complainant, noting that seven members of his family had nominated for election to the local council and that if all The publication has neither amended or removed the online the family members were elected, there would be a local article, nor published a print correction. Although the council “with a majority from the one family”. publication later indicated it might be willing to write a follow- up article, this would not adequately remedy the significant The complainant said the suggestion that a majority of the inaccuracy and unfairness of the article. Given this, the local council might be from his family was inaccurate and Council concludes that the publication also breached General unfair and the publication would have been well aware of this Principles 2 and 4. given its experience in reporting on elections. The complainant said it was virtually impossible in a proportional preferential The Council considers that Imogen’s family had a reasonable election that a majority of local council members could be expectation of privacy in relation to details of Imogen’s made up from his family. health and her son’s vaccination status. In publishing such information, the publication failed to take reasonable steps The complainant said that the publication of the letter on to avoid intruding on this expectation of privacy. The Council the day before the election was unfair and lacked balance as accepts there is a strong public interest in reporting on he was not afforded the opportunity to respond in the same matters of public health. However, having regard for the edition. The complainant also expressed concern about the unusual medical circumstances surrounding Imogen’s death, effect the letter had on his mayoral candidacy, saying that he the relevance to the public in reporting on this matter was lost the mayoral election by a small margin and noting that less strong than it might have otherwise been. Given this, copies of the letter were distributed by his political opponents the Council concludes that the intrusion on the family’s via social media. reasonable expectations of privacy was not sufficiently in the The complainant said he wanted the publication to publish an public interest. Accordingly, the publication breached General apology and a correction to resolve the complaint. Principle 5. The publication said it published the letter the day before the The Council also considers that in suggesting that Imogen’s election as it considered the views expressed by the writer son was the cause – or the likely cause – of her death, the were newsworthy, relevant and represented a concern within publication failed to take reasonable steps to avoid causing its community. The publication said that over the course of substantial distress to the complainant’s family, which for the election, it published a number of articles concerning the same reasons was not justified by the public interest. candidates in what it described as an unusual election Accordingly, the Council concludes the publication breached campaign that involved anonymous threatening letters, police General Principle 6. being called, and verbal attacks on the outgoing mayor. The Reliance on whistleblowers and other confidential sources is publication said that, in the course of reporting such stories normal journalistic practice. The Council does not consider the and seeking comment from the complainant, relations with the publication failed to take reasonable steps to avoid publishing complainant became strained and communications with him material gathered by deceptive or unfair means. Accordingly, eventually ceased. It said in this context, and with the letter not the publication did not breach General Principle 7. containing any offensive comments or comments suggesting the complainant was acting inappropriately, it did not contact the complainant for comment.

67 Full Adjudications

CONCLUSION a train” at a named station in Sydney in front of “horrified passengers” and went on to describe witness accounts The Press Council’s Standards of Practice require that that “train drivers rushed to help the man who was wedged publications take reasonable steps to ensure factual material under the front carriage while commuters looked on”. The is presented with reasonable fairness and balance and article contained seven photographs showing ambulance and writers’ expressions of opinion are not based on significantly emergency officers at the train station, including one of the inaccurate factual material or omission of key facts (General platforms which, although it did not show detailed activity, was Principle 3) and where material refers adversely to a person, accompanied by a caption including the words “police cleaning provide a fair opportunity for subsequent publication of a reply blood off the train pictured” and three other photographs if that is reasonably necessary to address a possible breach of showing a stretcher, with one of these depicting the lower General Principle 3 (General Principle 4). half of a covered body on a stretcher being placed in an The Council considers that the letter suggested that only ambulance. It also said “Thousands of office workers in North one member of a “family” should be permitted to stand Sydney would likely need to take buses home as police said for elections. In this respect, the letter was adverse to the trains could be cancelled for several hours.” complainant’s candidacy for the position of mayor, because The Council asked the publication to comment on whether it could be understood as suggesting that to vote for the the article breached its Standards of Practice, in particular complainant could contribute to what the writer considered whether the publication took reasonable steps to avoid was an undesirable outcome. causing or contributing materially to substantial offence, As the letter was published on the day before the election distress or prejudice, or a substantial risk to health or safety – with no balancing comment or response from any source, the unless doing so is sufficiently in the public interest only fair time for the publication to afford the complainant an (General Principle 6). opportunity to respond was in the same edition, which did not The Council also asked the publication to comment on occur. The Council concludes that the publication breached whether its Specific Standards on the Coverage of Suicide General Principles 3 and 4 by publishing the letter, which were breached, in particular Specific Standard 3, which contained material adverse to the candidate, and failing to requires that in deciding whether to report a suicide – which afford the complainant a fair opportunity for reply before the includes attempted suicide – consideration should be given election was held. The Council considers it was not necessary, to whether clear and informed consent has been provided in reaching this conclusion, to determine the effect, if any, of by appropriate relatives or close friends, or whether such the publication of the letter on the election result. reporting is clearly in the public interest; Specific Standard Complainant/Daily Mail Australia 5, which requires that the method and location of a suicide should not be described in detail unless the public interest in Adjudication 1744 (June 2018) doing so clearly outweighs the risk, if any, of causing further suicide; and Specific Standard 7, which requires that reports of The Press Council considered whether its Standards of suicide should not be given undue prominence and great care Practice were breached by an article published online on should be taken to avoid causing unnecessary harm or hurt 30 May 2017 by Daily Mail Australia headed “Commuter to those who attempted suicide or to relatives and others who chaos as man throws himself in the path of a train in front have been affected by a suicide or attempted suicide. of horrified passengers on a busy Sydney platform – and drivers have to drag him from under the carriage.” Below The publication said its reporter was a witness to the incident the headline were several bullet point sub-headlines, and provided information and photographs to its news desk. including “Young man jumped in front of train” and the It said the news desk carefully considered the images before name of the station, that “He tried to kill himself in front publishing them and determined they would not be likely of horrified passengers” at a stated time, repeated the to cause distress. It decided against publishing other more reference to drivers having to “drag the badly injured man graphic photographs. The publication said it did not intend to from under the front carriage” and that trains were shut cause offence and took care to ensure that all information was down between two major stations in Sydney “just before published with sensitivity. peak hour”. The publication said the article was in the public interest The article reported that a “Young man jumped in front of as the attempted suicide took place in public with dozens

68 2017–2018

of witnesses and caused major disruption to the transport not exercise special sensitivity and moderation in reporting network and the article highlighted that trains were cancelled the incident and breached Specific Standard 7 on Coverage of around peak travel times. It said the location of the attempted Suicide. suicide was a key part of the story and in the public interest to Note: If you or someone close to you requires personal report, and that the method was well known. assistance, please contact Lifeline Australia on 13 11 14. The publication said it acknowledged some of the wording in the article was strong, but this and the included photographs Complainant/news.com.au did not glamorise suicide or present it as a solution to a vulnerable person’s problems. It also said the one photograph Adjudication 1739 (June 2018) featuring the young man did not depict anything likely to cause The Press Council considered whether its Standards of distress. Practice were breached by an article published on news. The publication said the article also included details of how com.au on 8 September 2017, headed “Marriage equality witnesses to the incident felt, and it hoped this would show supporters clash with churchgoers in Brisbane protest”. vulnerable people that committing such a public act can emotionally impact others around them. The subheading read: “SAME-SEX marriage supporters claim cars were used as weapons in the first violent clash between CONCLUSION ‘yes’ and ‘no’ campaigners ahead of the postal vote.” Below this was a 27-second excerpt of video from the scene, which The Council notes the use of explicit language such as “shows protesters gathering around a four-wheel drive trying “leaping”, “wedged under the front carriage”, “drag him to make its way through the crowd”. The opening paragraph from under the carriage” and “cleaning blood off the train” began: “THE debate over same-sex marriage turned ugly in the headlines, text and captions. The Council considers last night when a protest by ‘yes’ campaigners erupted into that this language together with the photographs would violent scenes. Protesters outside a Brisbane church claimed contribute to some readers experiencing some offence and they were attacked with cars as they gathered to oppose a distress. However, the Council considers it was not such as to meeting they described as a ‘homophobic forum’.” Further on, contribute to substantial offence and distress. Accordingly, the it reported: “The event, which gathered support on Facebook, publication did not breach General Principle 6. was billed as a ‘protest/dance party/street festival/glitter fest’, The publication, in deciding whether to report the attempted but quickly deteriorated into a violent clash between ‘yes’ and suicide, did not try to contact appropriate relatives or close ‘no’ campaigners.” friends for consent. Although the Council accepts that The article also reported that police “attended the gathering reporting on the public transport disruption was in the public at St Michael’s Dorrington Catholic Church at Ashgrove and interest, this public interest could have been served without at least one woman was treated by paramedics”, the person reporting the incident as an attempted suicide. Accordingly, who reportedly “was injured at the scene”. She was the only the publication breached Specific Standard 3 on Coverage of individual from the scene whose words were quoted. She said Suicide. she “suffered an injury because people drove their cars nearly The Council accepts that the public interest justified the at full speed into the ‘yes’ campaigners”. A caption to one of reporting of the location of the incident given its relevance the three photographs, attributed to the television station from to the resulting public transport disruption. However, the which the video excerpt was sourced, said: “Police officers Council considers it was not sufficiently in the public interest were called in to bring the crowd under control but no arrests to publish the method of the attempted suicide. Accordingly, were made.” the publication breached Specific Standard 5 on Coverage of The second half of the article referred to the protest in the Suicide. broader context of the “national postal vote”, including comments from two politicians, and mentioned a “petition The Council considers that the use of explicit language to calling for support for the Australian Medical Association’s describe the accident and its aftermath in the headlines, text position in favour of marriage equality”. and captions together with the photographs themselves gave undue prominence to the attempted suicide rather than the The Council asked the publication to comment on whether, disruption to public transport. In doing so, the publication did in reporting on the protest, it took reasonable steps to ensure

69 Full Adjudications

factual material was accurate and not misleading and The Council also considers that in reporting a “violent distinguishable from other material such as opinion (General clash”, the basis for which appeared to be only one quoted Principle 1), and was presented with reasonable fairness and demonstrator, there was no attempt to test the reliability of the balance (General Principle 3). claims, particularly an allegation as serious as people driving their cars “nearly at full speed into the ‘yes’ campaigners”. The publication said the reference to “clash” in the headline Absent police or other comments supporting such statements was appropriate and correct use of the word does not and absent an opportunity for anyone from the church to require or necessarily imply violence. It said proponents for provide comment, the Council concludes that the publication and against same-sex marriage clash in their beliefs and failed to take reasonable steps to ensure fairness and balance demands. in the article. Accordingly, the publication also breached The publication said the article, for instance in the subheading, General Principle 3. makes it clear that allegations such as cars being used to attack people were mere claims. It said paramedics treated Sporting Shooters’ Association one woman at the scene and police at the time said one person was arrested for obstructing police. of Australia/Herald Sun It also said the article did not deal solely with the protest Adjudication 1742 (June 2018) but reports a number of developments in the same-sex marriage issue and a range of views from both sides. It said The Press Council considered a complaint from Sporting the article was based on witness accounts and footage from Shooters’ Association of Australia (SSAA) about an article the protest – included in the story – as well as information published in Sun on 20 June 2017, headed provided at the time by police and ambulance services “Gun trolls target charity: Members distraught” in print confirming the incident. and online the previous evening, headed “Gun lobby trolls trying to shut down Alannah & Madeline Foundation [AMF] CONCLUSION over anti-firearm stance”. The Press Council considers that the reference to a “clash” in The first paragraph of the article reported that the AMF the headline, the statement in the subheading that “cars were “has had to offer counselling support for staff distressed by used as weapons” and the statement “quickly deteriorated ‘aggressive’ trolling from the firearms lobby”. The remainder in to a violent clash” amounted to statements of fact and an of the article comprised statements attributed to the Chief assertion that there was a violent clash. Executive of the AMF who said that “gun-lobby bullies have The article appeared to rely on untested claims of a single tried to ‘intimidate, shout down and abuse’ the foundation”, that demonstrator that “people drove their cars nearly at full it was “a tactic the (US gun lobby group) NRA does all the time” speed into the yes campaigners”. The article contained no and that each time someone made a positive comment on its material supporting the claim that the clash was violent. social pages about its work, “the gun lobby piles on to them and The claims were questionable on the information presented. abuses them”. The article also included comments by the Chief Police were said to be in attendance but “no arrests were Executive saying that “the gun industry worked to increase made”. The video depicted protestors chanting with placards demand by telling disenfranchised men they were being and police ushering a slow-moving car through the crowd of victimised if their right to own better weapons was denied”, and demonstrators. that this “is what the gun lobby tells them, that if they had these The publication said that although the reporter made some guns, they wouldn’t feel disempowered anymore”. inquiries with police about the protest, the reporter was not The complainant said the article’s sweeping references to “the at the scene and had based the coverage of the protest on gun lobby”, “firearms lobby” and “gun industry” misleadingly footage from a television station broadcast the evening before and unfairly implicated individuals and organisations that publication. promote the sensible and lawful use of firearms. The The Council concludes that in reporting a “violent clash” in the complainant said the sweeping terms of the article imply its manner that it did, the publication failed to take reasonable involvement in or encouragement of the alleged behaviour steps to ensure factual material was accurate and not despite the fact that it condemns the conduct of trolls. The misleading and was distinguishable from other material such complainant also said the article implies that it and other as opinion. Accordingly, it breached General Principle 1. reputable organisations that are part of the “gun industry”

70 2017–2018

campaign to recruit “disenfranchised young men as the misleading aspects of the article were not addressed by a gun owners”. correction or other adequate remedial action, the publication breached General Principle 2. The complainant said it was the state’s largest gun industry body but no balancing comment was sought from it or The Council also considers that the failure to seek a response from any other body that is part of the gun industry such as or comment from any organisation or body in the gun lobby, retailers, suppliers and member organisations. It said that firearms lobby or the gun industry amounted to a failure to members of the gun industry were given no opportunity to take reasonable steps to ensure the article was presented with respond to the article’s implication that they were involved reasonable fairness and balance. Accordingly, the publication in the online “trolling” and that they campaign to recruit breached General Principle 3. “disenfranchised young men as gun owners”. As the complainant did not seek the publication of a reply In response, the publication said the article did not name the in response to the article, the Council concludes that the complainant or state that it was involved in any of the activities publication did not breach General Principle 4. reported on in the article. It said the use of the word “lobby” A complaint was made that the publication failed to take referred only to a group of like-minded people seeking to lobby reasonable steps to ensure an alleged conflict of interest for an outcome. The publication said the clear implication from was avoided or adequately disclosed, but this complaint was the interview given by the AMF’s chief executive was that those not pursued. involved in the abuse were fringe elements of the gun industry. The publication said that given the article did not identify any David Gallagher/The Sun-Herald single group – including the complainant – and that the online abuse was perpetrated by anonymous individuals using social Adjudication 1741 (June 2018) media accounts, it did not require balancing comment from The Press Council considered a complaint from David the complainant or any other responsible group within the Gallagher about a front-page article in The Sun-Herald gun industry. on 9 July 2017 headed “The deadly hidden disorder inside CONCLUSION our university colleges”, featuring a large photograph of the complainant’s deceased daughter and her mother. The The Council’s Standards of Practice applicable in this matter full article began on page eight, headed “Deadly conditions require publications to take reasonable steps to ensure factual hidden inside unis”, followed by the subheading: “Students material is accurate and not misleading (General Principle 1) living on campus could be heading into a culture that and presented with reasonable fairness and balance (General makes eating disorders worse …” The article was also Principle 3). If the material is significantly inaccurate or published online, headed “The deadly hidden disorder misleading, or refers adversely to a person, publications must inside our universities”. take reasonable steps to provide adequate remedial action or an opportunity for a response to be published (General The article referred to the death of the complainant’s daughter, Principles 2 and 4). Rebecca Gallagher, in June 2016. It stated that she “had died from complications believed to be associated with anorexia The Council considers that the article claims that there was nervosa”. It said she was a resident at a particular college and “aggressive trolling” from the firearms industry and drew no described the circumstances in which she was found dead distinction between reputable organisations in the firearms inside her dormitory. It said Rebecca’s death notice asked that industry and online trolls, and that the criticism in the article donations be made to a charity supporting those suffering from applied to all parts of the industry. Accordingly, the Council eating disorders. The article included comments from various considers that the publication failed to take reasonable steps people “about the impact of eating disorders in university to avoid the misleading implication that reputable members of college settings”, including from a university researcher who the firearms lobby may have been involved in the abuse. “said communal living, rigid meal times, and the college culture The Council also considers that the article implicates of sexual objectification could exacerbate eating disorders”. reputable organisations within the “gun lobby”, “firearms It included comments from some female university students lobby” and “gun industry” as being involved in the online abuse about their experiences with college culture and its effect on of AMF staff and appealing to “disenfranchised young men”. their dieting and body image. The article also included the Accordingly, the publication breached General Principle 1. As names and occupations of Rebecca’s parents and the region in

71 Full Adjudications

which they worked. It said a “NSW Police spokeswoman said remedial action or an opportunity for a response to be published a report was being prepared for the coroner,” and concluded (General Principles 2 and 4). The Standards of Practice also with support contact details for anyone “experiencing an require publications to take reasonable steps to avoid intruding eating disorder or body image concerns”. on a person’s reasonable expectation of privacy (General Principle 5) and causing or contributing materially to substantial The complainant said the article was published on the eve of offence and distress (General Principle 6), without sufficient his daughter’s birthday without regard to the distress it would justification in the public interest. cause his family despite their wish to have details identifying Rebecca withheld. The complainant said this intensified The Council notes the uncertainty regarding the cause of and prolonged the family’s grieving. He said the inclusion Rebecca Gallagher’s death, given there is no coronial finding of details identifying him and Rebecca’s mother – together at this time. However, it accepts that the publication sought with the prominent photograph – intruded on their privacy. confirmation from the college, the police and other sources The complainant also said by including this information, and concerning the cause of her death. In such circumstances, the adding to the online version of the article that “the family Council is not satisfied the publication failed to take reasonable [ … was] contacted before publishing this story”, it misleadingly steps to ensure the presentation of factual material was suggested they cooperated in the publication of the article and accurate and fair in this respect. Accordingly, the publication did agreed with the account of Rebecca’s death and its association not breach General Principles 1 and 3 in this respect. For the with her college attendance. Moreover, the publication same reasons, General Principles 2 and 4 were not breached. asserted the cause of death before the coroner had made a However, the addition of the words “the family [ … was] finding in relation to this. contacted before publishing this story” to the online article In response, the publication said the article was in the public did misleadingly suggest the family had cooperated with interest on a subject of health and safety, and Rebecca’s tragic the publication. Accordingly, the publication did breach death was reported in the context of a significant problem General Principle 1. Given the publication was aware of the of eating disorders in Australian university settings. It said complainant’s concern in relation to this, General Principle 2 the circumstances of Rebecca’s death were corroborated was also breached. by authorities at the college, those who first found her The Council notes the public interest in reporting matters of body, police and multiple friends. It also said that prior to public health and safety; for instance, in exposing potential publication it read the article to the complainant’s lawyer and risk factors for young university college students. However, the was informed that while the family would prefer the article publication was aware of the complainant’s wish that the article not be published, the accuracy of the factual material was not be published. The Council considers that the complainant largely undisputed. The publication said the inclusion of and Rebecca’s mother had a reasonable expectation of privacy Rebecca’s parents’ names and occupations was to outline and that the details relating to them would not be published. As her background and give a sense of her life. It said the article the publication did not take reasonable steps to avoid intruding did not include quotes from her parents and the phrase the on the complainant’s reasonable expectations of privacy, and “family was contacted” in the online article was not intended there was no public interest justifying this, the publication to imply cooperation. It said this was deeply regrettable, as breached General Principle 5. was publishing the article on the eve of Rebecca’s birthday. It apologised for the distress this caused the family. The Council notes that the publication of the article occurred on the eve of Rebecca’s birthday, a year after her death. The CONCLUSION Council accepts that this exacerbated the complainant’s The Council’s Standards of Practice applicable in this matter distress, as did the inclusion of details relating to him require publications to take reasonable steps to ensure factual and Rebecca’s mother. The statement in the online article material is accurate and not misleading (General Principle that the family was contacted prior to publication implied 1) and presented with reasonable fairness and balance, they cooperated with the publication. This would also have and that writers’ expressions of opinion are not based on exacerbated their distress. In such circumstances, the Council significantly inaccurate factual material or an omission of concludes that the publication failed to take reasonable steps key facts (General Principle 3). If the material is significantly to avoid causing substantial distress to the complainant and inaccurate or misleading, or not reasonably fair and balanced, his family, without sufficient public interest justifying this. publications must take reasonable steps to provide adequate Accordingly, the publication breached General Principle 6.

72 [email protected] www.presscouncil.org.au THE AUSTRALIAN PRESS COUNCIL Level 6, 53 Berry Street North Sydney 2060 02 9261 1930 1800 025 712 [email protected] www.presscouncil.org.au