Adjudication No. 1403  (adjudicated September 2008)

The Australian Press Council has dismissed a complaint from Dr Daud Batchelor over material published in The Australian on April 22 and 23, 2008 and in the two weeks following concerning Griffith University receiving funding from the Government of Saudi Arabia.

The complainant argued that the reporting and commentary on it had no reason to state that the funding provided to the university might influence the University in promoting hardline Islam, particularly within their Islamic Research Unit, because the funding had been provided on a "no strings attached" basis. He further asserted that it was not unusual for Islamic educational institutions to be funded by Muslim benefactors and governments. He also claimed there was no secrecy about the funding as he asserted the articles implied.

The newspaper said its coverage of the issue was fair, accurate and balanced and that it was in the public interest. It cited as evidence for this the fact that the University subsequently announced that it would no longer chase any further Saudi funding.

The Council believes that the coverage of the matter was in the public interest. The April 22 and 23 articles quoted a university lecturer and a judge respectively. The articles did not claim that the donation was a secret, however they pointed out that the University had offered to keep it anonymous.

The University and the complainant were given sufficient opportunity to state their position. The University was extensively quoted in the April 22 article. The University did not return phone calls to the newspaper prior to the publication of the April 23 article.

In addition, the newspaper published an article, and an opinion piece from the University's Vice Chancellor, on April 24 in which the University's case was extensively put.

The complainant organised a letter to the editor on behalf of a number of Islamic organisations. An edited version of the letter was published on April 28.

Over the ensuing two weeks there were a number of follow-up articles and numerous letters to the editor, containing a variety of views including a number supporting the views of the complainant.

In dealing with allegations of biased or unfair coverage in such a series of investigative articles, the Council considers to whether all parties are treated fairly. In this case, the Council is concerned that the pejorative language used in the articles, and some of the headlines, indicates that the newspaper's view on the Griffith University funding influenced the reporting of the news. Nonetheless, the funding debate was fully covered by the newspaper, allowing all parties to respond to claims and, as a result, overall, it was fair and balanced.

[ return to top ]

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