The Australian Press Council has considered complaints from James Sharp who objected to a total of three by-lined opinion articles by Greg Sheridan in The Australian on 23 and 28 October 2010 and 5 March 2011.
The first two articles comment on issues related to boat arrivals, asylum seekers and government policy; the 5 March article includes comments based on a Senate Estimates Committee hearing during which there was an exchange between a senator and the head of the Immigration Department. In all three articles, there are frequent references to refugees arriving in Australia by boat as “illegal immigrants” and "illegals”, and use of the expression “illegal immigration” in respect of their arrival in Australia.
The complainant’s primary objection is that the use of those expressions inaccurately describes asylum seekers and potential asylum seekers, that it is derogatory and that it unfairly denotes criminality. He also complained that the report of the Committee hearing misrepresented those involved and implied that they used the disputed terms.
The newspaper defended its use of those expressions by asserting they have common and wide usage, being employed by politicians and officials, and in everyday conversation. The newspaper denied that the expressions complained of were inaccurate.
The Press Council’s Guideline (No. 288) notes that the descriptor "illegal(s)" is very often inaccurate and, because it typically connotes criminality, it is unfair. It recommends the use of the term "asylum seeker" as a widely understood descriptor, and generally a fair and a sufficiently accurate one. The Australian acknowledged that it was aware of this suggested usage. Indeed, the Council upheld a similar complaint against The Australian as recently as July 2009. Despite that, the disputed expressions appeared in the three articles subject of this complaint. The Council acknowledges that some politicians, and others in public life, use the term “illegal(s)”, and that this can create difficulties for the press in reporting these matters. However, the fact that some people may use what may be considered inaccurate terminology should not be used to justify inaccuracy or unfairness in reporting. The Council holds the view that opinion and commentary articles are no different to other articles in their need to ensure accuracy and to avoid unfairness and that these articles failed to do so. Accordingly this aspect of the complaint is upheld.
The term “illegal immigrants” was not used by politicians or officials participating in the Senate proceedings reported in the 5 March article. The tone and wording of the article strongly suggests otherwise. Accordingly, the separate complaint about misrepresentation in this article is upheld.
