From: Stephen Hagan Sent: Sunday, 26 February 2012 2:47 PM To: Amy Donaldson; Cc: Lin Buckfield Subject: NIT response to Media Watch inquiry

Dear Ms Donaldson,

Thank you for your email of 23 February alerting me to material we have published which has included material sourced from other news organisations.

Our goal has always been to inform Indigenous Australians throughout Australia of important social issues affecting our people every day of the year. We are a small publishing business and obviously without the resources of the major news organisations in Australia. Yet my staff and I are very committed to doing whatever we can to provide as much information as possible Indigenous Australians would otherwise not have access to.

Our specific target audience is Indigenous Australians and we circulate largely in areas outside the prime distribution areas of most other media. Yet the importance of issues such as the terrible suicide rate besetting Indigenous communities or what Indigenous and non-Indigenous political leaders may think with regard to changes to the Australian Constitution, is of significant importance to all Indigenous Australians and their communities throughout Australia and the Torres Strait Islands.

I have been heartened and grateful for the positive response I have received from other news organisations where we have published material initially sourced by them. Those organisations accept our publication is not significant in their prime market areas and they also accept all we are seeking to do is try and contribute positively to changing the sometimes terrible conditions many Indigenous communities have to contend with. I believe by providing Indigenous Australians with news and information they would not normally have access to assists them in being more aware of what is happening to their fellow Indigenous Australians throughout the country.

Having said that I accept it is appropriate our publication should acknowledge and attribute any significant contribution those news organisations may provide to any article we publish. In future we will do our very best to ensure appropriate attribution is included in any article we publish.

On 23/2/12 5:27 PM, "Amy Donaldson" wrote:

Dear Mr Hagan,

Media Watch is looking at a number of stories published in the National Indigenous Times that appear to be sourced from other news organisations. Our analysis indicates that the majority of content in the NIT has been reprinted, often with minor alterations, from its original source, and generally without attribution. We have included a short list of examples at the end of this email.

We tried to contact you via phone this afternoon to give you a heads up without success, and will try again in the morning.

We would appreciate your response to the following questions:

1. Does the NIT have an agreement in place with News Limited, Fairfax Media, the ABC and AAP which allows it to republish material sourced from these publications/organisations in print and online? If not, has the NIT approached these organisations for permission to use their material? Further, has the NIT compensated the organisations for the use of material subject to copyright restrictions? If not, why not?

2. Our examination of NIT editions of 1, 8, 15 February 2012 and 14th December 2011 revealed many articles are essentially press releases printed in full. Some other articles are bylined with the names of media officers writing about their own organisations, with no declaration made to readers. How does the NIT explain the uncritical publication of publicity material?

3. Some articles we have looked at have been re-printed by the NIT months after their initial publication. For example, an article from the Port Macquarie News published on 22nd August, 2011 was reproduced on p.49 of the 14th December NIT edition with the headline „Surf's 'essential' at Flynns Beach‟; a story from The Age published on 9th Sept 2011 was reproduced on p.14 of the 8th February 2012 NIT edition with the headline „Native history buried under houses‟. How does the NIT explain this lack of timeliness?

4. In at least one instance we found an article was published in the news section which appeared to be an opinion piece: “Time to stand up to government by standing down” by John Rowsthorne on p.6, 15 February 2012. How does the NIT justify the placement of this piece in the news section without signifying that it is, in fact, opinion?

5. How many journalists does the NIT employ on staff?

6. Following your appointment as editor of the NIT in 2010, you said in a media release: 'I will be taking [the NIT] in a different direction, although government decisions affecting indigenous people will be given critical scrutiny ... What I envisage is a paper that caters for all views, but one that is a must-buy for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families’. Considering this statement of intent, do you believe that the NIT is serving its readership well?

If you are able to respond by 5pm tomorrow, 24th February, that would be much appreciated. If you need more time, please feel free to call and discuss anything further.

Regards,

+++++++++++++++

Examples:

-“Tony Abbott holds race key says Noel Pearson”, by Patricia Karvelas in The Australian, was reproduced by the NIT on February 15, 2012, p.1, headlined “The Pearson Abbott Show”.

-“Suicide Among Children as Young as 11”, by Russell Skelton in The Age/Sydney Morning Herald, was reproduced by the NIT on February 15, 2012 as two articles on p.3, headlined “suicide horror” and “Committee told number of deaths may actually be even higher”.

-Press releases from The National Congress of Australia‟s First Peoples and the Secretariat of national Aboriginal and Islander Child Care are reproduced on p.4 of the NIT on February 15, 2012 respectively as “Withdraw Intervention Bill, Demands Congress” and “Intervention extension contravenes human rights, says child care group”.

-“Study finds Indigenous stroke victims less likely to survive” by Amy Corderoy in the Sydney Morning Herald on February 9 2012, is reproduced on p.5 of the NIT on February 15, 2012 as “Study finds Indigenous stroke victims less likely to survive”.

-“O'Shane judged wanting by a higher court” by Paul Bibby in the Sydney Morning Herald on February 4 2012, is reproduced on p.4 of the NIT on February 8, 2012 as “Supreme Court Judge joins the queue of O‟Shane critics”

-“Jenny Macklin 'set to extend cash control'” by Michael Owen in The Australian on January 31 2012, is reproduced on p.5 of the NIT on February 8, 2012 as “SA communities bracing for Territory-style Intervention”

-“All hail new king of Yarrabah” by Heather Beck in the Cairns Post on December 12, 2011 is reproduced on p.3 of the NIT on 14 December 2011 as “Hail King Jabaan, newly crowned King of Yarrabah community”

- “Divide over Woodside gas hub decision not so black and white” by Paige Taylor and Tony Barrass in The Australian on 8 December 2011 is reproduced on p.4 of the NIT on 14 December 2011 as “New vote on gas hub is possible after Court win”

- “Lawyer warns of hidden dangers in changes to Constitution” by Stuart Rintoul in The Australian on 10 December 2011 is reproduced on p.4 of the NIT on 14 December 2011 as “Professor warns Panel about race changes to Constitution”