Australian Press Council
 

Adjudication No. 1299  (adjudicated September 2005)

The Australian Press Council has upheld the main thrust of a complaint from the Council of Official Visitors and the Western Australian Department of Health about two reports published in The West Australian on 16 March 2005. The Council commends the newspaper for its attempt to make amends through mediation and regrets that the opportunity for settlement offered by the newspaper was missed.

A front-page report, headlined Naked walker is prime double murder suspect, concerned the deaths of a woman and her four-year-old daughter at Margaret River and suspicions that a family member with a history of mental illness had killed them. The report was accompanied by a large photograph of a naked man who had been wandering in the streets after the killings.

Although the photograph did not show the man's face, the caption and the story identified him by name and stated that he was related to the two deceased. The second report, which mainly concerned the background of the dead woman, also named the man in the photograph and said that he was suspected of the killings.

On 18 March, the newspaper published seven letters from readers responding to the initial report, all of them critical of the newspaper's action in publishing the photo. Along with these letters, the newspaper published a much smaller version of the photo. Other critical letters were published on other days.

Dr Judyth Watson, for the Council of Official Visitors, a mental-illness advocacy group, and Dr Rowan Davidson, chief psychiatrist of the WA Department of Health, separately complained to the Australian Press Council.

Both complainants had a range of objections to the reports, including the use of the man's name and publication of his history of mental illness, but it was the use of the photograph which was of greatest concern.

The complainants said the photograph's publication demeaned and humiliated the man, violated his privacy and exploited his vulnerability. They said that by placing gratuitous emphasis on his mental illness, the newspaper reinforced the stigma of such illness.

The West Australian said that its decision to publish the photograph had not been taken recklessly but had been the subject of much discussion among senior editorial staff. It said that the photograph, taken in a public place of an incident witnessed by the public, was of compelling news value. The man's mental health had been relevant to the report but had not been over-emphasised. The newspaper said that its staff received training in how to report mental health issues with sensitivity and that its publication of the critical letters demonstrated its willingness to give weight to contrary views.

The newspaper suggested the matter could be resolved through a mediation with the complainants.

In a mediation conducted by a public member of the Australian Press Council, the newspaper offered Dr Davidson the opportunity to have published in The West Australian an opinion piece of up to 1000 words putting forward the case for careful handling by the media of mental health patients and mental health issues. It also offered Dr Davidson the opportunity to address each year's new intake of journalism cadets and to work with The West Australian's supervisor of cadets on other possible training.

Regretably, Dr Davidson and Dr Watson rejected the newspaper's offer. Their rejection of the newspaper's offer to have an opinion piece published and to influence the training of young journalists is a missed opportunity to further a worthy aim.

The West Australian's suggestion of mediation was a sincere attempt to provide redress to the complainants. Its offer, taken with the publication of the critical letters, represented a reasonable and adequate response.

Nonetheless, the publication of the photograph, and the second publication on the letters page two days later, breached the Council's principle on respect for the privacy and sensibilities of individuals, and to this extent the Council upholds the complaint.

return to
Adjudication index

[ return to top ]

 

Documents with the pdf icon icon require the Acrobat Reader, a Free Utility from Adobe. Click here for more information.

   
       
 

About the Council [ its history and benefits of self-regulation | Members] |
Adjudications | Complaints [ Privacy Standards | Complaint Procedure | Make a Complaint ]

Public activities [ Council publications | Case Studies |
APC Fellow | Public Forums | APC Prize ] | Annual Address ] |
Freedom of the Press | What's New | APC News | Guidelines | Links |
Search this site [ by keyword or browse the sitemap ] |


   
       
 

Last updated 15 September 2005

All material ©The Australian Press Council.
Email: info@presscouncil.org.au
Copyright and Disclaimer Notice

Website Design, Construction & Maintenance by
Catherine McDonnell and the Australian Press Council.