Media ReleaseAustralian Press Council welcomes two small publisher members and a new Council memberMore
Media ReleaseAustralian Press Council responds to withdrawal of Media Entertainment and Arts AllianceMore
Media ReleaseAustralian Press Council introduces complaints-handling processes for global digital publishersMore
Standards of PracticeAdvisory Guidelines23-Oct-2021Advisory Guideline Opinion polls Opinion polls are an important source and subject of news stories. Newspapers and broadcasters often commission their own polls to provide information about readers’ views or voters' intentions. Opinion polls can be an effective tool in measuring what people think about issues, political parties and candidates. However, the public needs to be able to judge properly the value of polls. This requires that publications provide sufficient background information to prevent results from being misconstrued. Publications should take special care to do so in election periods. Reports should not use language that overstates the possible interpretations or meaning of polls. Writers of opinion pieces and editorials should take care when referencing or interpreting polls to provide, where possible, context or information to enable readers to locate the poll results.1 Space considerations may restrict the amount of background information that can be provided about a poll, but background information on at least a number of important details is desirable This can be placed in the main body of an article, a footnote, another section that may be read separately or, if online, via a hyperlink. Editors should take reasonable steps to ensure that reports about previously unpublished opinion poll results include, or have been written taking into account, at least the following matters: the name of the organisation that carried out the poll the identity of any sponsor or funder2 the exact wording of the questions asked; a definition of the population from which the sample was drawn; the sample size and method of sampling3 the dates when the interviews were carried out. Publications are also encouraged to consider including the following matters where possible: how the interviews were carried out (in person, by telephone, by mail, online, etc); and the margin of error. Editors and reporters should carefully evaluate whether to report online surveys, having regard to their scope and methodology.4 They should be cautious of open-access online polls where the sample size and the exact questions asked are unknown and the results have been generated by self-selecting respondents.5 Reports should not imply that the views of panels or focus groups or vox pops and straw polls represent the views of an entire population or the electorate at large. References Adjudication No. 1636 (April 2015). Adjudication No. 1383 (January 2008) Adjudication No. 1636 (April 2015); Adjudication No. 1383 (January 2008). Adjudication No. 1383 (January 2008). Relevant Adjudications Adjudication No. 1636: Complainant/The Sunday Mail (April 2015) Issue: poll referenced in an opinion piece – question of whether it would be interpreted by readers as fact “The text of the print and online material included the statement that ‘[o]ur Galaxy Poll today clearly shows that Queenslanders are embracing asset sales rather than reduce government services or increase taxes’” “The material did not provide any statistical results, methodology or other details of the poll. There was no reference to any place where such details might be found. An article on page 8 of the print version did not provide these details. A separate online article on the same day said the survey involved 800 Queenslanders and found ‘38 percent of peopled believed asset sales were the best option to reduce debt, compared to 21 per cent for increased taxes and 24 per cent for reduced services’.” “In this case, the unexplained and unqualified reference to the poll results relating to asset sales, government services and taxes was not distinguishable as the publication’s opinion about the meaning of the poll. The material was likely to be read as a statement of fact.” “The failure to indicate where detail of the poll findings and methodology could be found and the fact that the detail which was provided elsewhere did not enable readers to ascertain whether the statement in the material was opinion or fact, meant that relevant facts were not disclosed.” “Accordingly, the Council considers that the print material on page 54 and the online editorial were in breach of General Principle 6. It recommends that publications consider the Council’s Advisory Guideline on opinion polls which it issued in 2001.” General Principle 6 at the time was as follows: “Publications are free to advocate their own views and publish the by-lined opinions of others, as long as readers can recognise what is fact and what is opinion. Relevant facts should not be misrepresented or suppressed…” More
PolicySubmissions10-Jun-2011Submission: Response to the Framing Paper of the Convergence ReviewNote: The Australian Press Council has kept this response within what it understands to be the very limited scope of comment sought by the Committee at this stage on the principles and policy considerations proposed in the Framing Paper. Its substantive views on specific aspects of regulation of convergent media will be provided in accordance with the Committee’s subsequent processes. A proposal for an additional Principle The principles should give specific attention to the importance of providing Australians with ready access to sources of news and opinion which comply with adequate core standards of accuracy, fairness, balance, integrity, civility and responsibility. These core standards are of such fundamental importance to the general public interest, including the maintenance of democratic governance, that they should be included specifically in the principles. It is not sufficient to rely on them being partially implied, perhaps, in the references to “diversity” (Principle 1) and “community standards and the views and expectations of the Australian public” (Principle 5). Indeed, they can be jeopardised by undue emphasis on those considerations. Explicit mention at this high level of policy development is also necessary because the opportunities and challenges of convergence are already having profound impacts on the observance of the core standards by new entrants as well as longer-established participants. Appropriately adjusted regulation will be essential to maximise the future benefits and minimise the adverse impacts. Accordingly the Press Council proposes inclusion of the following principle after the current principle 6: In particular, the provision of news and opinion through these services should be subject to adequate standards of accuracy, fairness, balance, integrity, civility and responsibility. OR In particular, the provision of news and opinion through these services should be subject to standards which adequately reflect the public interest in accuracy, fairness, balance, integrity, civility and responsibility. Issues arising from the current Principles Principles 1-5: Compliance with these principles will require ready availability of a wide range of news and opinion from international, national and local sources which is not unduly constrained by governments or other powerful interests. Principle 6: Compliance with this principle must strike an appropriate balance between the needs of highly specialised and well-resourced consumers and the preservation of ready access to core services for people of modest means or broader interests. Comments on the “other policy considerations” Issue: The impact of legislative and regulatory frameworks outside the Minister’s portfolio that may impact on issues within the scope of the review: The Council notes, in particular, its own system of developing and promulgating standards for publication of news and opinion, and of mediating and adjudicating on complaints about alleged breaches of those standards. Its non-statutory jurisdiction embraces all major print outlets in Australia and their associated websites. Issues: Appropriate ways to treat content sourced from outside Australia; International approaches and Australia’s international obligations: In principle, standards of reporting should not vary according to the geographical source. Difficulties of enforcement should not be regarded as necessarily precluding worthwhile regulation, especially in light of possible advances in technology and international cooperation. More
PolicySubmissions27-Oct-2011Submission: Independent Media InquiryThe submission to the Independent Inquiry into Media and Media Regulation describes progress to date in each of a number of key areas that are part of a sustained program of reform by the Australian Press Council, commenced in early 2010. View Online
PolicySubmissions02-Oct-2011Submission: Letter to the Chair of the Independent Media InquiryLetter from the Press Council Chair, Professor Julian Disney, responding to questions from the Chair of the Independent Media Inquiry, Mr Ray Finkelstein QC. Letter from Mr Finkelstein to Prof Disney View PDF Response from Prof Disney View PDF More