WAPC Helsinki Conference

The World Association of Press Councils held its first European Regional Conference in Helsinki, Finland, in June. Prof David Flint represented the Australian Press Council at the Conference.

The World Association of Press Councils (WAPC) held its first European Regional Conference in Helsinki on 31 May and 1 June 1995. 78 delegates from 22 countries attended the conference.

The Opening Session was held on the evening of 31 May and was opened by the conference organiser, Professor Christoffer Gronholm, who introduced the speakers. Prof David Flint (Australia), the Chair of the WAPC Executive Council, delivered a keynote speech in which he emphasised the role of press councils in advancing the freedom and responsibility of the press.

Raimo Pekkanen, the Chair of the Finnish Press Council, spoke on the growing need to help journalists in developing and democratising countries in establishing press councils and codes of ethics. He reported on the work of the Finnish Council. Peter Stenlund, Chair of the Advisory Committee of International Human Rights Affairs in the Finnish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in an opening address, stated that he believed that the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) should not be involved in regulating freedom of expression. He noted that the Council of Europe was particularly interested in media law and that technological development meant that it was no longer easy for dictators to keep people in dark. The WAPC should play a vital role in initiating ethical discussions, and in assisting in development of press councils,particularly in the new democracies. He believes the WAPC should participate as an NGO when the OSCE meets in October 1995.

Charliaos Papadopoulos (Cyprus), the Chair of the Committee on Mass Media of the Council of Europe, spoke on the work of the committee. He noted Resolution No. 2 of the Prague Declaration which sets out principles defining freedoms and rights, duties and responsibilities of journalists, duties to society and individuals, including respect to rights of others and which is strongly self-regulatory.

Press Councils in Europe

At the first session on 1 June, Paiva Sonninen (Finland) presented a survey of press councils in Europe. Most deal with both print and electronic media. Their major concerns include appropriate sanctions, publication of adjudications and fund-raising.

Tiina Laitila spoke to her paper "Codes of Ethics in Europe". Most codes of ethics have been developed by journalists themselves. One (Denmark) was adopted by the state. Most recent codes emphasise fairness; privacy and professional secrecy are also present. There are 10 principles common to the codes. Most of those which are different are found in the codes of the former socialist countries, e.g. not to work in intelligence services, or to work to strengthen the state or society. There are no regional commonalities, e.g. among the Nordic codes.

Legal Restrictions on the Media

Prof Flint proposed a project which would aim at a definitive study of legal restrictions on the media in various countries. He referred in particular to defamation, race hate law and concentration of ownership. On the latter, he noted the paper of the British Media Industry Group, "A New Approach to Cross Media Ownership", in which size of circulation plus viewing/listening audiences, nationally and regionally, were proposed as the criteria for limits on ownership. He referred also to the Indian and British experiences.

Justice A.A. da Silva (Sri Lanka) spoke to his tabled paper on Sri Lankan restrictions, including defamation and contempt. The President of the Austrian Press Council referred to the reporting of cases in such a way as to undermine the credibility of courts. He did not suggest the law should correct this, but media have a duty to report the courts properly.

Designing a Dispute resolution System

Justice Erik Holmberg, Chair of the Swedish Press Council, delivered a paper. He referred to the long standing bases for freedom of the press in Sweden. Press councils must be independent, enjoy the confidence of the press and the confidence of the public. Said Sonbol (Egypt) asked for a precise definition of a press council. In reply to a question, Justice Holmberg reported that papers in Sweden pay money to the Council if they are members. Others may pay, but do not have to. The Council does not fine newspapers.

Questions were asked about the time it took to adjudicate on a complaint. It was pointed out that councils also mediate, where matters can be resolved quite quickly. Some councils took only one month on average to adjudicate, the Danish on average two months. The Danish Press Council receives about 150 cases a year of which 100 are adjudicated. The normal period is three months. Funds come from the Ministry of Justice, but there is no attempt to influence the Council by Government. The Swedes mediate many complaints through the Press Ombudsman.

Said Sonbol and Betzalel Eyal (Israel) also outlined the experiences of their respective councils.

An Ethical and Quality Audit of the Press

Professor Louise Hermanson (USA) said that press councils should be a forum for members of public to speak about press performance (in addition to their adjudicating role). Research shows people sometimes sue to be heard. When she did her survey of North American news councils for her PhD, she was surprised by the reaction: how people were pleased about being asked and wrote to say so. Councils can show how the editorial process works. The public, too, have a responsibility.

Professor Kaarle Nordenstreng of Tampere University (Finland) noted that the owner of freedom of expression is "everyone", the citizen, not the media, owners or journalists. He referred to a paper from Spain - "Journalism and Democracy - Ethics" and in particular, the section on "Information as a Fundamental Right". In his analysis, there are three players in media relations: media, politicians (or government) and citizens:

• politicians read and are influenced by the media;
• outside of elections, an oligarchy is in control; and
• the media inform and influence citizens.

In the real world the media is central. Ideally, the media should be a service rather than a commercial business, should not be a fortress media and should be self contained and not self serving. Accountability by definition requires accountability to an outside force. How should these outside forces be mediated? Prof Nordenstreng suggested that quality has been poorly defined by media journalists.

Prof Flint explained the Australian experience with its ethical and quality audit - including its survey of complainants, the case studies seminar and questionnaires at public meetings.

Gary Gilson (USA) said complaints take place in a well-defined area which is defined by journalists. He referred to a complaint by a woman enrolled as a journalism student and working for a newspaper. With the financial support of the newspaper she enrolled in a course in women's studies. She complained about a story in The Star Tribune. It stated that the Women's Studies Department lacked intellectual rigour. The paper replies that those attacked had opportunity to respond. This satisfied the need for balance. The complainant argued that this was not real balance - why not have objective outsiders to offer their views. The Council dismissed the complaint.

Prof Nordenstreng noted that even with transnational publishing and broadcasting, local news will remain predominant. There will be elite international papers and broadcasters in English, but there will always be a local press. Some were critical of "advocacy" journalists who are careless about facts. Advocacy still requires observance of ethical rules. Prof Nordenstreng referred to the work of Jay Rosen (NY University) on public journalism. People don't lack information. But the political and media oligarchies have stolen power. He referred to work on a "People's Communication Charter". We have to balance the huge concentration of power by people becoming active as media consumers. A first draft for a declaration of rights of members was produced for an international convention - a Magna Carta for consumers. Ted Turner welcomed it.

Transnational Broadcasting and Publishing

Prof Flint referred to recent matters concerning transnational broadcasting and publishing:

• taking the BBC off the northern band of Star TV;
• taking a Star TV talk show off air after an interviewee made insulting remarks about Mahatma Gandhi;
• The Economist published in full a letter from the High Commissioner of Singapore noting it was complying with the "right of reply" legislation;
• lack of authorised satellite dishes in Singapore at the outbreak of the Gulf War delayed news and is said to have affected the market adversely;
• Iran recently legislated against satellite dishes;
• an Indian colleague complained to him that the BBC refers to names of communities when reporting communal violence in India.

Mr Papadopoulos referred to European Media Resolution of the Council of European Convention. He said he had adopted a similar instrument - a directive. It has been in force 3 or 4 years. Should there be similar world wide legislation? The European directive is more about industrial matters, protection of minors, advertising, than cultural concerns. There are three safeguards:

• the right to broadcast;
• freedom of reception within frontiers; and
• states are not opposed to retransmission of programmes which respect the rules of the convention/directive. Retransmission may be subject to limitations.

The EU Directive is being redrafted in Brussels.

Final Session

This session was chaired by Ramasingam Gunasingam (Malaysia), the WAPC Secretary-General, who gave some background to the formation of the WAPC.

Oktay Eksi (Turkey) commented on international reporting of Turkey's role in Iraq. He had raised this with Prof Flint who had asked for a summary of the reports, in English if possible. These were tabled. It is said Turks attacked not PKK, but Kurds, i.e. the civilian population. This, he said, was an absolutely unfounded allegation. Turkish forces had damaged villages, civilians were wounded. The population were invited to make claims, and that was assessed at US$44,000, probably more. This was first time in this part of world that damages had been agreed for such action. The WAPC Charter does not seem presently to allow it to evaluate and adjudicate transnational complaints. It seems as long as unfounded broadcasting and publication continue, the WAPC should, he thought, find an appropriate solution. He asked that the association think about this and look for a solution within the framework of WAPC or other ways of doing it.

Mr Papadopoulos noted that not only was he chair of the Mass Media Council of Europe, but that he came from Cyprus. He was surprised that this was discussed during the final session. The newspapers, the subject of Mr Eksi's observation, included a number of the world's leading newspapers. Did it cross Mr Eksi's mind that these would have conspired together? The Chair of the Austrian Press Council counselled against hearing transnational complaints. If we did we would be flooded with complaints. Mr Eksi felt there should be such a facility.

Prof Flint reported on progress for the WAPC's first world conference in Colombo in August and requested comments on a report on the European Community's press. Prof Nordenstreng will complete a report on European Press Council and on ethics for Colombo. To make this worldwide, and keep it up-to-date, would require some funds. It could be put on the Internet.

Mr Gunasingam and Prof Flint complimented Prof Gronholm for his work and thanked the delegates for their attendance and their contributions to the discussions.

David Flint

see also
Index on David Flint's material on the website

[ return to top ]

Return to APC News 1995 Index

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