Complaints Not Adjudicated: 1998-1999

The Council actually adjudicates only about one in five of the formal complaints received. The rest are dealt with by the secretariat in various ways as outlined in the statistics.

Those statistics only deal with 'formal' complaints, that is ones received in writing. For every written complaint received, there are three or four which never reach that stage. Many putative complainants contact the office seeking advice on how to deal with a matter. They are usually advised to make direct contact with the offending publication or are directed to another organisation such as the ABA, the ABC Independent Complaints Review Panel, the Advertising Standards Board, Anti-Discrimination Board or whatever. Most phone inquiries never become formal complaints.

Of the formal complaints, there are several stages through which they pass, and many do not proceed to the next stage.

• Refusal
  
• Referral
  
• Withdrawn for legal action
  
• Not followed up
  
• Mediation
  
• Withdrawn ofter correspondence
  
• Adjudication
  
• Other

Refusal

The Council has given the Executive Secretary a discretion of determining if there is a breach of ethical standards demonstrated by the complaint when it is received. The Executive Secretary can reject a complaint at this first stage (although his discretion is appealable to the Council's Complaints Committee). There are many reasons for refusal but the most common is that no breach of the principles was shown by the complaint. This is particularly the case where the complaint was about the non-publication of a letter, or about a disagreement with an expression of opinion, including through a cartoon.

The Council's principles stress two instances where letters have a greater chance of publication - where they are needed to correct harmfully inaccurate material or where they are needed to balance criticism. Other letters have to take their chances with the great number now received daily by publications.

Unless it raises some major question of taste or vilification, or there is a demonstrable error of fact involved, a clearly marked opinion piece, editorial or cartoon is generally not of itself open to complaint. The Council is, however, more sympathetic to a concern that, where the opinion contains criticism of an individual or group, no opportunity for balancing response was given.

The Council does not deal with matters that are largely of a commercial nature, unless they impinge on the journalistic aspect of publications. Accordingly, competitions, classified ads and promotions are not usually considered the subject of a complaint. An exception here is the question of 'advertorials' where paid advertising affects the editorial content.

This year there were the usual collection of even more outré complaints which were refused, including:

• A magazine's front page claim that it is 30 years old was inaccurate.
• A complainant who was angry at a paper's use of 'American' spelling.
• Another complainant who wanted $100,000 to compensate for an insult published by a paper.
• The press suppressed the story of the chaos with computers that was meant to occur on 1 January 1999 (received in December 1998).
• A 13 year old columnist reviewed an MA15+ movie.
• A complainant believed its local paper should have a letters to the editor page.
• A complainant wanted compensation for incorrect information in the financial pages.
• Photographs of racing cars, featuring tobacco logos, breached health guidelines.

Last year, complaints refused were 17.3 per cent of the total dealt with.

[ return to top ]

Referral

Any formal complaints about advertising are sent to the Advertising Standards Board; complaints about an individual journalist are referred to the AJA Judiciary Committee of the MEAA; complaints about the electronic media are referred either to the broadcaster or the ABA; complaints about the ABC are forwarded to the ICRP; and various other bodies receive appropriate matters.

Last year, complaints referred were 3.3 per cent of the total dealt with.

[ return to top ]

Withdrawn for legal action

The Council's procedures are intended as an alternative, not a complement, to the courts. The secretariat is obliged to separate out those complainants who have threatened, or may threaten, to take legal action on the matter about which they are complaining. It asks such complainants to sign a deed of release, relinquishing their rights to take subsequent legal action. A Victorian case, Watts v. Hawke and David Syme & Co Ltd (Supreme Court of Victoria, [1976] V. R., 707-723), which held, inter alia

a contempt of court would be committed if a non-curial tribunal were to investigate and make findings on matters the same as those in issue in a pending civil action ...

reinforces the Council's view that such waivers be sought. Additionally, publications are given the option of seeking waivers from complainants in appropriate matters as well.

This is not a one-way street: the publications have already undertaken to abide by the Council's complaints procedures and to publish any Council determinations. Those which seek waivers from complainants are reinforcing their undertaking to abide by the Council's procedures.

Here are a couple of instances from the last year where the Council took no further action because it received no waiver:

• A complaint against a regional daily and its journalist, who had allegedly colluded with a magistrate "to ensure that the maximum damage has been inflicted" upon the complainant.
  
  
• An alternative medicine provider believed he was assisting in a promotional article, when in fact it was investigative. The complainant considered the subsequent article to be inaccurate and defamatory of him.
  
  
• Comments made by a representative of the Serbian community about the Albanian refugees were taken out of context. Talks between the complainant and the paper in having a follow-up article published broke down. The complainant decided to sue the paper.
  
  
• An article about the death of a retirement village resident contained "imputations defamatory of the village management, which are untrue and defamatory of other persons". A request from the complainant that the paper publish a retraction was refused, resulting in a termination of negotiations.
  
  
• An article concerning a local council debate contained "critical and defamatory comments in relation to a group of citizens". The secretariat requested the complainant sign a legal waiver. He refused.

Last year, complaints withdrawn for legal action were 6.9 per cent of the total dealt with.

[ return to top ]

Not followed up

If the secretariat is not clear on the meaning of the complaint or a copy of the article has not been enclosed, it seeks further advice or information from the complainant. If that further advice does not eventuate, the matter is closed.

Sometimes the Executive Secretary writes to a complainant and suggests a direct contact with the publication, by letter or phone. He adds, "If you cannot achieve a satisfactory settlement of the matter by direct negotiations, then bring the matter back to the Council as a formal complaint". If the complainant is not heard from again, the matter is closed.

On occasions fairly broad accusations are levelled, either at the press in general or at a particular organ, but the supporting material is not given. Again, if there is a chance that a formal complaint might eventuate, the Executive Secretary might seek further details from the complainant.

Previous Executive Secretaries have noted that many complainants are only seeking to have their views heard by someone, by anyone, and the acknowledgement of their complaint is sufficient. Many such complainants do not pursue their complaints after the initial contact.

Last year, complaints not followed up were 17.3 per cent of the total dealt with.

[ return to top ]

Mediation

If a complaint is accepted for processing, and a little over half of all complaints received are accepted for processing, the secretariat first seeks to contact the parties in appropriate cases to see if a mediated settlement is possible. The office then acts as a go-between to see if an agreed settlement can be reached. Such settlements usually result in the publication of some follow-up material, by letter, article, clarification or whatever. The office would prefer to deal with as many complaints as possible by this means and the Council encourages the informal resolution of complaints, including the use of direct mediation between the parties.

In recent times the Council and its Complaints Committee have sought to play a more active role in the mediation of complaints. More are now settled by the direct intervention of the committee at a hearing or by a panel of Council assessors. The Council is now developing a system whereby its public members may be able to play a more active role in mediating complaints in their own bailiwicks.

In recent years, more publications have developed their own complaints-solving mechanisms and often amicable settlements on matters which might previously have come to the Council are arrived at before the need for the Council's intervention. The development of a greater willingness in publications to deal directly with complainants where there is a need is one of the more major benefits arising of the Council's work.

During the year, the Council publishes a summary of many of the mediations in its quarterly newsletter. For those who missed them, here are a few of those settled in this way during the last twelve months:

• A suburban newspaper referred to a local resident as a "pensioner". The resident asked for an apology for the appellation, which she considered discriminatory. After the secretariat contacted the newspaper, a letter of apology from the editor, and the journalist, was forwarded to the complainant. This was followed-up with a telephone conversation between the parties. The complainant was very satisfied with the outcome of her complaint.
  
  
• A bylined columnist for a metropolitan daily republished extracts from a book on sex "laws". A local ethnic community body was offended by one reference, which it said was inaccurate and racially inflammatory. The columnist published an apology in a subsequent column, published in each newspaper in which the column appeared, and a private apology was sent to the complainant. These actions satisfied the body.
  
  
• A bylined article in a metropolitan newspaper regarding a Federal Commissioner's report to Parliament misrepresented the facts. The commissioner had been unable to have a balancing response published. After representations from the Council, the letter to the editor was published with prominence. The complainant thanked the secretariat for its prompt action, and withdrew his complaint.
  
  
• An historical article was published in a suburban weekly newspaper. The article was based largely on the research of the complainant, who was not accorded credit for her work. There were also a number of errors in the article. The editor published a correction of the errors, and credited the complainant and her co-authors for their historical research.
  
  
• A statement published in a suburban newspaper by a racecourse commercial manager was unfounded. The editor's formal response was sent to the complainant, and a follow-up article published. The complainant was satisfied.
  
  
• A regional daily published a quote from the mother of a 15 year old runaway that her son was confused about his sexuality. The newspaper was unaware that the mother was unwell and her views on the matter unreliable. A conciliatory response by the editor was sent to the complainant (the boy's father), and a letter from the boy, together with an editor's note published. Although this letter made clear that the boy's sexual preference was not the cause of his actions, the complainant remained unhappy. Various attempts at reconciliation proved fruitless. The Council then conducted a face-to-face mediation between the parties, at which the matter was successfully resolved to the satisfaction of all.
  
  
• A report in a regional daily of a court appearance of a man with the same named caused concern to the complainant. After consultation with him, the paper agreed that the age and address of the accused would be more prominently featured to avoid confusion.
  
  
• A suburban newspaper published a letter to the editor which attacked a conservation group. Various members of the group wrote letters in reply, none of which were published. The paper had no record of receiving the letters. It satisfied the complainant by publishing a follow-up article, giving the complainant's point of view.
  
  
• A metropolitan Sunday printed inaccurate information, obtained from a wire service, on a new world record. The complainant, in fact, holds the record. The paper and the complainant agreed on a clarification which set the record straight. The complainant was happy with this approach.
  
  
• A regional daily ran an opinion piece which made derogatory remarks about a specific group of people. The paper published both an apology from the bylined writer, together with a clarification and apology by the paper. The complainant was prepared to let the matter rest, given the steps taken by the paper.
  
  
• A metropolitan paper published a photograph from the Vietnam War. The complainant, the daughter of the pictured soldier, believed the juxtaposition of the photograph and the headline to the story could lead readers to believe her father tortured captured Vietnamese. The matter was referred to the Complaints Committee. At the hearing, the parties thought they might be able to reach a settlement of the matter. The matter was adjourned. The parties agreed that a notation be placed on the photograph files in respect of the complainant's father, and a clarification was published in respect of the original publication and text.

[ return to top ]

Withdrawn after correspondence

If mediation is not possible, or if it fails, then the publication is asked to make a formal response to the Council, in writing, responding to the complaint. When received, that response, together with any supporting material is sent to the complainant. The complainant is given a choice of letting the matter rest or of referring it to the Council for adjudication. The office occasionally makes a recommendation that the complaint be withdrawn at this stage if it believes that the publication has responded in such a way as to make the complaint not viable. But the decision to withdraw or refer is one that rests solely with the complainant, who has the carriage of the complaint.

In some cases, complainants submit further material relevant to their complaint, although, in the interest of a speedy resolution of complaints, this is discouraged.

Complainants who respond no further after receipt of the publication's response or who advise the Council of the withdrawal of their complaint are categorised as 'withdrawn after correspondence'.

Last year, complaints where the newspaper's actions met the complaint - those that were either mediated or withdrawn after correspondence - were 36.8 per cent of the total dealt with.

[ return to top ]

Adjudication

Last year 17.1 percent of complaints were referred by complainants to the Council for adjudication.

They averaged 13 weeks from receipt of first letter to determination of the complaint. The quickest was adjudicated five weeks from receipt of the letter and the slowest (which involved a delay as there were two complainants, one of whom took many months to decide whether to sign the waiver) took 23 weeks.

[ return to top ]

Other

Some complaints are settled by the issuing of a general press release or by the publication in the newsletter of an article by the complainant. There was one complaint settled by GPR last year - see GRP 221.

Complaints about threats to the freedom of the press, lodged by publications against individuals or authorities, are referred to the Council's Freedom of the Press Committee which determines whether there is a need for any further action on them. One such complaint was the one settled by GRP 221 as noted above. A second concerned the possible refusal of credentials to a freelance photo-journalist by a sports federation. This was settled amicably, after Council intervention.

Anonymous complaints, and those for which the office cannot establish a bona fide name and address, are not processed but closed immediately.

Last year, complaints closed by these and other miscellaneous methods comprised 1.3 per cent of all complaints dealt with.

[ return to top ]

Thank you

During the year, we received a number of thank you letters for the manner in which complaints we dealt with by the office. But, because it also included Council members, we particularly liked the following:

Once again I thank you and the members of the Press Council Committee for your assistance, concern, and mediation to enable this result to come about. There is no avenue that I know of upon which to turn when personal endeavour fails in these matters, but the Press Council. It is a body of kindly, learned people for whom I, as a member of the public, am most grateful. Please express my thanks to all concerned. Long may they function for the benefit of all those who feel they have in some way been misunderstood by the press.

[ return to top ]

View the details of complaints not adjudicated for each of the following years:

[ return to top ]