|
 |
 |
|
August 2007 - Volume 19, No. 3
News in brief - August 2007 News by email News by email Press Council publications will sent by email to those who ask for delivery in that form. If you want the News sent direct to you (in pdf format) please send an email to info@presscouncil.org.au with subject line 'News by email' and you will be placed on the direct email list. [ return to top ] Return to APC News 2007 Index APC Prize There will be no Essay Prize in 2007-2008. As in previous years, the Council will be making a series of awards for outstanding scholarship through the various journalism departments and faculties at Australian tertiary institutions. The Council is endowing a prize worth $300 this year, either for outstanding achievement in a course directly related to the study of print journalism, particularly in the area of ethics, or for a particular piece of work in that area.
For more information on the APC Prize, its history and future [ return to top ] Return to APC News 2007 Index On the Council On 30 June, Warren Beeby, the long-time representative of News Limited on the Council, retired from the company. Consequently he also resigned from the Council. The company nominated Campbell Reid, the Editorial Development Manager, as his replacement, with Sharon Hill to continue as his alternate. Campbell Reid has recently been appointed group editorial operations director at News Limited and is a former editor of The Australian and of the Daily Telegraph, Sydney. Max Walsh, the representative of ACP Magazines, has also retired from active journalism and offered his resignation to the Council. ACP magazines has nominated Pam Walkley, editor of Money Magazine, as his replacement and she takes up her role from August 2007. She had acted as the company's alternate for a number of years. Lloyd Whish-Wilson, a member of the panel of editor members, decided to take up a position with Fairfax Media. As the members of the panel are expected to be independent of the publisher members of the Council, Mr Whish-Wilson resigned from the Council. At the August meeting, the Council appointed Warren Beeby to the panel as his replacement. Warren Beeby is the former Group Editorial Manager for News Limited and has been a member of the Council since 1989. After serving three three-year terms as a member of the panel of independent journalist members, Sandy Symons has left the Council. On the nomination of the Chairman, the Council has appointed Prue Innes as the new member of the panel. After a cadetship at the Herald and Weekly Times, with most of it on The Sun, and stints in radio and TV newsrooms, Prue Innes went to The Age where she became a specialist court reporter and then law reporter. She was a member of the review panel of the MEAA and the inaugural chairman of the national ethics panel, until resigning earlier this year. Prue was the first media officer in the Victorian court system, until July 2007. The regional dailies will be represented for the next eighteen months by Bruce Morgan, General Manager of Ballarat's daily newspaper The Courier, and formerly its editor. He has 34 years experience in newspapers covering metropolitan, regional and country newspapers in four states and in a variety of positions, including having worked on all three daily newspapers in Tasmania. His alternate will be Peter Owen, former editor-in-chief of the Sunshine Coast Daily now working as an editorial executive for APN News and Media. In January 2009, Peter Owen will become the full member and Bruce Morgan will serve as his alternate. [ return to top ] Return to APC News 2007 Index Classification law changes In early July, the Press Council made a submission to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee Inquiry into the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Terrorist Material) Bill 2007. In its submission in response to the Attorney-General's earlier discussion paper on the proposals, the Council expressed concerns with regard to the proposed amendments and their potential to act as an impediment to free speech. The Council acknowledged that the Bill in the form in which it was introduced into Parliament has advanced some way towards addressing the concerns raised in its previous submission, particularly by the inclusion of exemptions and a form of public interest defence in the Bill. However, the Council did not believe that these changes went far enough to adequately protect freedom of speech. Its view remained that the definition of "advocate" used in the Bill was too broad. Two particular phrases needed to be removed from schedule 1 of the Bill. First, the phrase "or indirectly" should be removed from clauses 9A(2)(a) and 9A(2)(b). Secondly the phrase "or any mental impairment" should be removed from clause 9A(2)(c). The inclusion of these phrases has the potential to prevent the publication of material that provides information or commentary and that is appropriate subject matter for public discourse. The Council was also of the view that the wording of the exemption clause was unnecessarily restrictive in its reference to the sort of material that would be protected by the exemption and sought a widening of this definition. The full submission has been posted to the Council's website. [ return to top ] Return to APC News 2007 Index Classification changes go too far The Senate committee recommended some anodyne changes to the proposed Bill so, on 6 August, the Chairman of the Australian Press Council, Professor Ken McKinnon, issued a statement in which he said, "The proposed amendment to classification laws, currently before the Senate, aimed at restricting the publication of material that 'advocates' terrorism, are unnecessary, dangerous and inimical to essential freedom of communication. It is a further egregious example of the government's consistent tendency to legislate limits on the public's access to information." The government has already demonstrated that it has at its disposal powers more than sufficient to restrict dangerous publications, including laws against sedition, advocacy of violence, racial vilification and various provisions within the Criminal Code and anti-terrorism legislation. The issuing of an "RC" classification by the Classification Review Board against Defence of the Muslim Lands and Join the Caravan in 2006 clearly shows that the present scheme leads to bans on public access to material that advocates terrorism. In fact, the current classification powers are so sweeping that they even allowed the banning of Dr Philip Nitschke's, The Peaceful Pill Handbook, action well beyond any desirable public restrictions on the free flow of information. The new proposals, if enacted, will not only put material that directly advocates terrorism outside the law but also anything considered by authorities to indirectly advocate terrorism. Opinion or commentary upon the news, or material that analyses the underlying causes of terrorism, may still be banned, given the narrow scope of the exemptions in the Bill. There is a justifiable fear that such material may be incorrectly regarded as "indirectly advocating" terrorism, which would inevitably lessen the availability of information to the public. Moreover, the fact that the standard of proof in classification will be "on the balance of probabilities", a much lower standard than the normal criminal requirement of beyond reasonable doubt, will make the proposed regime abhorrent. In dealing with the threat of terrorism it is important that the public is well informed on matters related to it. Research into the background of terrorism and terrorist groups can assist in safeguarding an open and liberal democracy. Similarly, there is a need to ensure that material that can aid research, add to our understanding of terrorism and assist in reasoned debate on the issues should not be arbitrarily restricted as a result of a Bill that contains definitions of "advocacy" that are far too wide. [ return to top ] Return to APC News 2007 Index Media and terrorism The Press Council had been represented at a meeting of the media and security personnel, convened by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI). The intention was apparently to formulate 'protocols' for the conduct of the media in event of a terrorism event in Australia. It appeared that the consultation with the media was initially intended to gain the co-operation of the media in restricting the flow of information to the public. Arising from that discussion ASPI issued a discussion paper that demonstrated that ASPI had listened to the comments made by the media at the consultation. The Council has now responded with comments to the ASPI draft. It notes that the media would have the primary responsibility for communicating important information to the public and the predominant source for that information will be government officials. As is already the case in other emergencies, the media would be keen to cooperate in informing the public The Council expressed concern that governments may seek to constrain media organisations through the centralisation of information and by imposing restrictions on what could be published, either by way of 'voluntary' codes of conduct, protocols or by legislative mechanisms. Noting that the public has a right to information on matters of public concern and to have the facts communicated to them in a timely, responsible fashion, the Press Council expressed the view that the best way to ensure that important information is disseminated to the public in a crisis situation is to establish relationships between media professionals and government officials and to provide media organisations with open and timely access to information so that they are not forced to rely on informal sources in order to establish the facts. It also noted that the codes of conduct already in place in the industry would be sufficient guides for editors making decisions on what material to publish in the aftermath of a terrorist incident. The Council encouraged ASPI to continue along the lines indicated by the draft discussion paper and looked forward to the development of cooperative mechanisms to ensure that the public is well-informed through the media in the event of any terrorist incident. For more information on defamation on this website: Defamation page. [ return to top ] Return to APC News 2007 Index Time to come clean On 25 June 2007, the day that two journalists were sentenced for their refusal to disclose the confidential sources for a story, the Press Council issued a statement arguing that the conviction, and sentencing, of two Herald Sun journalists protecting their sources illustrates the failure of governments to make themselves properly accountable to the electorate. Through the suppression of information and the rorting of freedom of information law, material directly related to government performance is not available through the press. The Australian Press Council challenged all governments to come clean and ensure relevant details are available to the public. The two journalists, Gerard McManus and Michael Harvey, had been directed, during the committal of a public servant to disclose sources in relation to a story (published in the Herald Sun 20 February 2004) embarrassing to the then Veterans Affairs Minister. At the time the Minister was trying to "spin" a cut in a promised program as some sort of windfall for veterans. Leaked material, made available to the journalists, demonstrated that the Minister was in fact reneging on an earlier undertaking. Fortunately, like former Customs official Allan Kessing late last week, neither McManus nor Harvey was given custodial sentences. But the convictions in the two cases are a further indication of a government obsessed with secrecy - seeking to punish both officials accused of providing information of clear public interest and journalists who publish that information. As the Council's Executive Secretary, Jack Herman, noted, "The Harvey and McManus case doesn't relate to a serious crime or a threat to national security. Their only real 'crime' is holding the government accountable to those who elected it, and pay for it." The Press Council notes that, if governments were to come clean with the Australian people on matters of public interest and concern, there would be no need for journalists to rely on leaked material for their stories. Instead, the Commonwealth government, by prosecuting the alleged sources and targeting the journalists, is attempting to intimidate public officials and the press into silence on issues that may throw light on government malpractice and chicanery. The importance of information from confidential sources was demonstrated in Queensland in the late 1980s when officials cooperated with Four Corners and The Courier-Mail in exposing corruption in that state. "Journalists should not be exposed to jail when performing their key role of finding and reporting the full story of issues that will enable citizens to assess the performance of elected representatives," said Mr Herman. Mr Herman observed that government "spin" is pervasive: "Governments exploit a variety of mechanisms to shape public opinion, not all of them reasonable. Pernicious, unattributable background briefings and selective information 'management' are the tools of trade. Governments do not want journalists to go beyond the partial, official story. They often prevent media access to information that ought rightfully to be in the public domain, as was the situation with the story that put these journalists in jeopardy. "Freedom of Information laws, supposedly designed to enable access to material of public concern, rarely help. Their intention is being frustrated by deliberate time delays, increased costs and the use of conclusive certificates to bar access to material." The Press Council calls on all governments, federal, state and territory, to ensure that information necessary to the public is made available and that journalists are not singled out for punishment for doing the right thing by the voters. For more information on protection of journalists' sources on this website: Protection of Sources page. [ return to top ] Return to APC News 2007 Index Incorporation As reported last issue, the Council has re-written its Constitution with a view to incorporating the Council under the provisions of the Associations Incorporation Act. The Council has operated as an unincorporated association since 1976 but, following registration in August 2007 by the NSW Department of Fair Trading, it will now operate as an incorporated association. There will be no overt change in the way in which the Council operates as a complaints-handling body. [ return to top ] Return to APC News 2007 Index Conference The Council has jointly sponsored a public forum with the Centre for Media and Communications Law at Melbourne University. The Courts and the Media conference was held in Melbourne on Friday 27 July 2007. After a keynote address by Justice Philip Cummins, Associate Professor Andrew Kenyon delivered a paper on the incidence of suppression orders (with former Victorian courts public information officer Prue Innes acting as a commentator on the paper). The second session addressed the question of journalists' sources. Solicitor Justin Quill read a prepared paper and comments were delivered by visiting US Professor Brian Murchison, Press Council member Chris McLeod and Fairfax executive Gail Hambly. The final session looked at the impacts the courts were having on Freedom of Information, with the 7 Network's Michael McKinnon the paper speaker and Monash Associate Professor Moira Paterson the commentator. The papers from the conference are available from the CMCL. A report of the conference is in this edition of the News. [ return to top ] Return to APC News 2007 Index Privacy In recent issues, the Council has noted the on-going review of the federal Privacy Act by the Australian Law Reform Commission. This review follows inquiries into the Act performed by the Privacy Commissioner and by a Senate Committee. The ALRC is looking both at the wording and operation of the extant Act, which by and large aims to protect the privacy of information on individuals held by private and public organisations, and at the possibility of the development a statutory cause of action for invasion of privacy. Despite the fact that there is existing federal legislation, and a review of that legislation due for report in 2008, and the fact that there are close to a 100 pieces of legislation in the states and territories that protect aspects of personal privacy, two state-based Law Reform Commissions have initiated inquiries into questions of personal privacy. The Executive Secretary and the Vice Chairman attended a consultation in June with the Victorian Law Reform Commission on the particular question of surveillance in public places. The VLRC's consultation process is to be completed by July, followed by the release of an issues paper. The NSW Law Reform Commission has been asked to look at three issues: how best to develop a consistent national privacy regime; how best to harmonise the various laws that form the existing privacy protections in NSW; and whether there is a need for a statutory tort of privacy in NSW. The LRC has issued a Consultation Paper that concentrates largely on the third term of reference - one already being addressed by the ALRC in its review. The Council is developing a response to the Paper to be submitted by mid-September. [ return to top ] Return to APC News 2007 Index Conciliated complaints The Council office tries to solve matters by direct contact with the publication concerned. This often leads to a settlement of the matter satisfactory to both parties. On occasion, an independent member of the Council (or a member of the secretariat) will convene a face-to-face conciliation, by agreement with the parties. Below are some examples of the matters recently settled in these ways.
[ return to top ] Return to APC News 2007 Index Documents with the |
|||
|
About the Council [ its history and benefits of self-regulation | Members] | |
|||
| & ; |
|
Last updated 21 September 2007 All material ©The Australian Press Council. Website Design, Construction & Maintenance by |
|||
In a ceremony in Hobart the 2007 Prize at the University of Tasmania was presented to the winner, Catherine Kelly, by Press Council member Cheryl Attenborough.
icon require the Acrobat Reader, a Free Utility from Adobe. Click 