Consumer Complaints about the Press

In an opinion piece written for the Newcastle Herald, the Council's Chairman, Professor Ken McKinnon, gives his interpretation of the Council's role.

Anyone can start a newspaper. You don't have to have a licence. The major newspapers can print whatever news or reports they think appropriate.

In the public interest editors routinely pursue and publish stories that those involved would much rather keep hidden, ranging from the Reith phone-card affair to Local Government rorts and personal scandals. Most also print a variety of strongly worded opinion-pieces, both conservative and radical.

This daily assembly, printing and distribution of newspaper to all parts of the nation is an enormous organisational feat. They keep us up to date, they inform us and sometimes they infuriate us.

But there are costs. Competition among newspapers is fierce. Daily deadlines create huge pressures. Even with the most careful checking, errors of fact or balance occur. What can you do if those errors that affect you?

Recourse to the law is always possible if your reputation has been damaged to the point of defamation. But ordinary citizens mostly want immediate corrections or apologies. They may feel that the defamation route is too difficult, too expensive, too uncertain.

This is where the Press Council comes in. It was set up twenty-five years ago by the industry to be its watch-dog. It has a healthy public representation. Members of the Council comprise ten public representatives from all states, ten representatives of media organisations, four journalists, two former editors and an independent chairman. (Twenty-one attend any meeting of the Council: 7 public, 10 industry, 2 journalist and 1 editor member, as well as the Chair.) It adjudicates complaints from the public about newspapers and magazines.

Adjudication of complaints is the visible face of the Council. Another equally important behind-the-scenes activity is representation to law makers and regulatory bodies to prevent restrictions on press freedom.

Here the focus is on adjudication. Any person perceiving errors of fact, fairness or balance can complain to the Council. There is no cost. Most newspapers are anxious to correct any errors and will do so quickly after the problem is brought to their attention by Council staff. Mediation, using a public member of the Council from that state as the mediator, is an additional avenue used successfully recently. About eighty per cent of complaints are resolved in these ways or in other ways by the office.

But editors do not respond positively if they disagree. They assert the right of the public to know. For instance they resist complaints of unfairness when they believe reports are balanced. They do not back off because some readers may be squeamish. Sensitive reports of accidents and local tragedies can lead to complaints of invasion of privacy. Reports of scandals can upset innocent and guilty alike. The right balance between the obligation to report the news and privacy is not always easily found.

Where errors are not admitted or mediation has been unsuccessful the Council has to adjudicate the complaint.

The complainant and the respondent editor have had access both to the initial grounds for complaint and subsequent exchanges of correspondence. Both can make their case personally if they wish during the next scheduled meeting of the Complaints Committee. The Committee deliberates on that input and makes a recommendation that goes the next day to the full Council for final adjudication.

The newspaper is expected to publish the Council's adjudication in full, especially if the complaint is upheld, in a prominent position and as soon as possible. Very rarely is there any delay or failure to do this. The Council also publishes the adjudications on its web-site.

Does the absence of a legislative basis make the Press Council a "toothless tiger" as Media Watch has claimed? After six months as Chairman I have not seen evidence of that kind. I am impressed by the importance editors attach to complaints. Journalists also report that both they and their editors dread complaints to the Press Council.

Two things, a desire to avoid gaining a reputation for sloppiness, poor research and a lack of fairness and balance, and recognition that tough self-regulation is preferable to any alternative, confer enough power on the Press Council to act successfully in your interests.

Professor Ken McKinnon

see also
How to make a complaint to the Press Council.

[ return to top ]

Return to APC News 2001 Index

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