Search

Introduction   Family violence is a serious cause of public concern and debate. Reporting on family violence once reflected an earlier social view that family violence was essentially a private, family matter that did not merit significant media coverage or the intervention of police and the criminal law, except perhaps in the most extreme cases. However, social attitudes have shifted dramatically and there is now community acceptance across Australia that family violence is unacceptable and against the law.   Most news coverage is now more responsible and assists with raising awareness. Nevertheless, concerns remain over some media coverage. The Australian Press Council’s Standards of Practice, particularly the Statement of General Principles, provide the standards to which publications must adhere, and which the Council refers to when considering complaints. This Advisory Guideline has been developed in consultation with editors, journalists, police, survivors, family violence service providers and others to suggest a “best practice” approach and should be supported by high quality education and training.   The Advisory Guideline is not intended to constrain or discourage news coverage or forthright debate about family violence. However, editors and journalists routinely exercise judgment about which events to cover; what information to collect and from whom; what material to include and what may be excluded in the interests of space and concision; and how to frame the story. The purpose of this Advisory Guideline is to help guide those considerations.   Definition and Scope   The Council uses the term “family violence” throughout this Advisory Guideline for the sake of simplicity. However, that term is commonly interchanged with “domestic violence” by the public, the media, the service sector and in academic and political discussion.   The relationship between the alleged offender and the victim is the key. Violence inflicted by a stranger would rarely be conceptualised as “family violence”. The coverage of a breaking story may need to respond adeptly to subsequent information from police or other sources when what first appeared to be an “ordinary crime” or a “tragic accident” might now be viewed through the lens of family violence. The crime statistics indicate most physical violence in the family context is inflicted by men against their female partners (or former partners), but this is by no means the inevitable pattern. Women sometimes use violence against men or children; people in LGBTI relationships may use violence against their same-sex partner; the abuse of elders may be perpetrated by their children or carers; and the abuse of people with an intellectual disability or other vulnerabilities may involve carers or others.   The Council notes that family violence can occur in a variety of forms and may include, but is not limited to, physical assault; sexual violence; emotional abuse; stalking or other types of harassment (in person, by phone or online); and other controlling or intimidating behaviour aimed at making the victim feel frightened or powerless.   Legal restrictions   Reporting of family violence is already heavily regulated and restricted by (often inconsistent) State, Territory and Commonwealth laws. Media organisations are subject to at least 40 different laws in this area, the breach of which may amount to an offence or contempt of court, or open up potential liability for damages under defamation law. These issues are considered in more detail on the Press Council’s website.   Safety   The safety and well-being of those affected by family violence must be the primary consideration. Publications should not publish information that could cause or contribute to the risk of harm, offence or distress. Survivors of family violence often comment that their pain and suffering was exacerbated by media coverage. In some circumstances, it may not be safe, appropriate or legal to use real names or other identifying information.   When interviewing a person affected by family violence, journalists should consider whether the person has the necessary support. Publications should consider the unintended consequences that interviews and published material might have on those affected by family violence, especially children, in the immediate short term and the longer term.   Responsibility   Reporting of family violence should try not to blame a person affected by the violence or suggest that the person somehow enabled the violence or could have avoided it. Publications should also avoid placing undue emphasis on the characteristics or surroundings of the victim, or implying that such things contributed to the family violence, unless doing so is essential to the narrative and sufficiently in the public interest. Use of the active voice in relation to the perpetrator will help avoid placing undue emphasis on the person affected by family violence. For example: “Police charged a 38-year-old Melbourne man with the murder of a 36-year-old woman”, as opposed to, e.g. “A 36- year-old woman was murdered and a 38-year-old Melbourne man has been charged”.   Cultural sensitivities   When reporting on matters that have occurred within Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, there are cultural practices and sensitivities around releasing names or images of deceased persons from these communities that should be considered. Similarly, publications should endeavour to be aware of such sensitivities in other Australian communities.   Context and content   The context and complexities of family violence should also be key considerations, such as when an alleged perpetrator may have a mental illness. Publications should note any such factors when it is warranted in a particular case and in the public interest. Care also should be taken to avoid casual stigmatisation, such as by stating or implying that the violence was “caused” by a person’s mental illness or culture. Words matter. Publications should be mindful of the language they use and try to avoid terms that tend to trivialise, demean or inadvertently excuse family violence, such as “a domestic”, “a domestic dispute” or “a troubled marriage”. Where it is lawful to do so, the relationships of the people involved should be described as accurately and precisely as possible.   In addition to reporting particular incidents, journalists can play a critical role in deepening readers’ understanding about family violence by referring to resources such as official statistics, peer- reviewed research, and experts, such as domestic violence counsellors and survivors.   Publications should also be aware of the potential impact of story layout, headlines and surrounding material (such as advertisements) that may be insensitive or jarring in the circumstances.   Sources of assistance   Where lawful and appropriate, it is strongly recommended that published material relating to family violence that could be distressing should be accompanied by information about sources of assistance. Neutral phrasing should be used, such as: “If you are affected by this story and want to seek assistance, contact ...”. When dealing with specific communities or circumstances, other useful sources of information should be included, such as the contact details of local or specialised sources of assistance. The Press Council’s website contains suggested sources of assistance and will be updated periodically.

The Australian Press Council’s Standards of Practice, particularly the Statement of General Principles, provide the binding standards to which publications must adhere, and to which Council refers when considering complaints. These General Principles cover accuracy and clarity; fairness and balance; privacy and avoidance of harm; and integrity and transparency.   In addition, Council has developed Advisory Guidelines on particular issues. These Advisory Guidelines provide additional information and resources on best practice reporting on these issues.  They may be taken into account by a Council Adjudication Panel in deciding whether there has been a breach of the Council’s Statement of General Principles, but Advisory Guidelines are not binding Standards.   The Council receives complaints about the reporting of the race, colour, descent, ethnicity and nationality of individuals or groups, and these raise important questions about the responsibility of the press in our multicultural society. The Council is principally concerned about references to race, colour, descent, ethnicity and nationality which promote negative stereotypes or prejudice in the community. The tone and context of such reporting is usually a crucial factor in determining whether the Council’s Principles have been breached.   In the Council's view, in general, the press needs to show sensitivity in reporting issues when groups of a particular race, colour, descent, ethnicity or nationality are the subject of public debate. Care needs to be taken to ensure that people are not portrayed as outsiders, dangerous or violent due to their race, colour, descent, ethnicity or nationality. The negative traits of an individual or individuals should not be represented as applying to entire communities.   Definitions and language   Defining race and ethnicity is complex and contested. The terms ‘race’ and ‘ethnic origin’ are referred to but not defined, for example, in the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth). Australian States and Territories have laws that define ‘race’. For example; the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 and  Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Act 1998 define race to include ‘colour, nationality, descent, ethnic, ethno-religious or national origin’, (with the Tasmanian Act also including ‘the status of being or having been an immigrant’); the Western Australia Equal Opportunity Act 1984 defines race to include ‘colour, descent, ethnic or national origin or nationality and the fact that a race may comprise 2 or more distinct races does not prevent it being a race’.   Researchers do not agree about how race and ethnicity should be defined.  Historically, race is often thought of in terms of shared physical attributes and ancestral origins, however, race and ethnicity have no biological meaning.   Whenever possible, journalists should ask people how they choose to define and describe themselves. Care needs to be taken not to assume that a person of a particular race, colour, ethnic origin or nationality is necessarily a spokesperson for others.   There is the danger of using the term ‘race’ where no such race exists; for example, there is no ‘Jewish’ race, nor a ‘British’ or ‘French’ race. Another danger is to accept too readily the race labels used by racist groups in hate campaigns; such labels should be examined carefully and critically.   The Council condemns use of offensive or prejudicial slang or outdated labels in referring to race, colour, descent, ethnicity or nationality. However, language that is considered offensive can change over time. Whether an expression is perceived as offensive can also depend on whether or not the person using the expression is a member of the race or nationality to which the expression refers.   If someone controversially uses such expressions, a publication may be justified in reporting them in direct quotes.   Accuracy   Publications are required to take reasonable steps to ensure that factual material in news reports and elsewhere is accurate and not misleading and is distinguishable from other material such as opinion.   Reporters are advised to take care to check facts, including in the reporting of overseas events and the names of persons reported in relation to such events.   The Council accepts that some international situations are extremely difficult to report or comment on without causing distress to different groups in the community. Many international conflicts and disputes, even when handled with sensitivity and impartiality, may arouse disagreement or passionate responses from readers.   Context and relevance   Reference to a person’s race, colour, descent, ethnicity or nationality should be relevant to a story and in the public interest. For example, it may be relevant and appropriate:  

• in an article about a person who has consented to the disclosure of that information as part of telling their story; and/or
• as part of an article examining a relevant issue about race or ethnicity. It may, for example, be relevant if reporting on a race riot.

  However, it may not be relevant in the context of reporting on the identity of persons accused of committing a crime unless it forms part of police descriptions of suspects, or it constitutes part of a fair and accurate report of court proceedings.   Overly prominent, and irrelevant references to a person’s race, colour, descent, ethnicity or nationality — particularly in headlines — can cause or contribute to prejudice especially when those attributes are linked to alleged or actual criminal activity.   Cartoons and context   Complaints about reporting of race, colour, descent, ethnicity or nationality are often made in relation to published cartoons. Cartoons are commonly expressions of opinion examining serious issues and which use exaggeration and absurdity to make their point. For this reason, significant latitude will usually be given in considering whether a publication has taken reasonable steps to comply with the Council’s Standards of Practice.   Nevertheless, publications must still take reasonable steps to avoid contributing to substantial offence, distress or prejudice unless doing so is sufficiently in the public interest. Council has upheld complaints against publications in respect of cartoons.   In some cases, however, the context of accompanying articles or letters to the editor, or of the political debate at the time, has led the Council to conclude that there is sufficient public interest in a cartoon’s subject matter to outweigh the substantial offense, distress or prejudice it may cause.   Fairness and balance   Publications are required to take reasonable steps to ensure that factual material is presented with reasonable fairness and balance, and that writers’ expressions of opinion are not based on significantly inaccurate factual material or omission of key facts. By way of example, in considering whether factual material has been presented with reasonable fairness and balance, it may be relevant to consider whether the omission of information leads to an unfair representation of the person or group being discussed.   Importantly, the obligation to present factual material with reasonable fairness and balance also applies to an opinion article.   Avoid substantial offence, distress or prejudice or substantial risk to safety   Publications are required to take reasonable steps to avoid causing or contributing materially to substantial offence, distress or prejudice, or a substantial risk to health or safety, unless doing so is sufficiently in the public interest.   Unnecessary emphasis on race, colour, descent, ethnicity and nationality should be avoided. Such references should only be included if they are relevant.   Reference to a person’s physical characteristics or ethnicity could be relevant, or in the public interest, when they are part of police descriptions of wanted suspects, particularly of suspects regarded as violent and dangerous. Ethnicity-based descriptors can be useful if they form part of an overall description that could lead to the arrest of an offender, and if the following principles are met:  

• they are used in the pre-arrest phase along with a physical description;
• they are not used once a person has been apprehended;
• they are used only to describe people whose ethnicity is unknown; or
• they are only used post arrest if a publication can demonstrate there is a genuine public interest in doing so.

  Conversely, ethnicity-based descriptors can be of limited effectiveness as they can be the result of emotional or prejudice-driven responses from witnesses who may be mistaken. They can also cause members of a given community to feel that they are being unfairly targeted.   When a person’s physical characteristics or ethnic background are part of court proceedings, they are then matters of public record.   The Council accepts that some situations are extremely difficult to report or comment on without causing offence to different groups in the community. This is particularly the case in reporting on events involving conflicts between members of different races, ethnicities or nationalities.   Cultural sensitivities   When reporting on matters that have occurred within Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, there are cultural practices and sensitivities around releasing names or images of deceased persons from these communities that should be considered. Similarly, publications should endeavour to be aware of such sensitivities in other Australian communities.   Supplementary resources   To assist our member publications in the reporting of matters related to race, these guidelines are supplemented by the national and international resources in Attachment 1.     Attachment 1 National and International Media Resources General resources National Union of Journalists. (2014). Race reporting guidelines. MEAA. (2020).  MEAA Guidelines on Reporting Hate Speech and Extremism. Race Forward. (2015). Race Reporting Guide. SBS. (2021). SBS Code of Practice (Section 5 on Respect). Australian Human Rights Commission. (2014). Casual racism FAQs. Australian Government.  The Australian Government Style Manuel on the use of culturally appropriate and respectful language when writing about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples. Narragunnawali. Terminology Guide: A Guide to Using Respectful and Inclusive Language and Terminology. Reconciliation Australia.  Demonstrating inclusive and respectful language.   Reporting crime and race NSW Police Force. Public Affairs Branch. (2022). Media Policy. Police Accountability Project. (2017).  Reporting crime and race: A short guide for journalists.   Reporting on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples Media Diversity Australia. (2018). Reporting on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and Issues: An introductory resource for the media handbook. Reporting on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and Issues: An introductory resource for the media quick guidelines. Australia Council for the Arts. (2019). Protocols for using First Nations Cultural and Intellectual Property in the Arts. SBS. (1997). The Greater Perspective: Protocol and Guidelines for the Production of Film and Television on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities. (2016-17). Supplementary Guidelines. Community Broadcasting Association of Australia. Codes of Practice - Code 4: Indigenous programming and coverage of Indigenous issues.   Reporting Islam Islam is a religion rather than a race, but stakeholders have suggested that there is benefit in including practical tips in relation to more mindful reporting of Muslims and the Islamic faith in the APC’s Advisory Guideline on Reporting of ‘race’. Reporting Islam Project. (2018). Reportage Handbook.   Sourcing experts Media Diversity Australia. Find-an-Expert directory.   Useful statistical data sets Closing the Gap. Closing the Gap Targets and Outcomes. (2023). Productivity Commission Dashboard.      

The Press Council advises newspapers and magazines to be careful about using in their headlines terms for religious or ethnic groups that could imply that the group as a whole was responsible for the actions of a minority among that group.   The use of the words "Islam", "Islamic" and "Muslim" in headlines on reports of terrorist attacks has caused problems both for the Muslim community in Australia and the Australian media. It is important for newspapers to identify as clearly as possible the sources of terror; casting the net of suspicion and accusation too widely can be harmful.   The Council is also aware of instances beyond the Australian Muslim community, and the concern with terrorism, where the use of overly general terms has caused concern for Indigenous people and the Australian Jewish community, among many others.   The Council acknowledges that, in some cases, the linking of words with religious connotations to terrorist groups may be, in the strictest sense, accurate - but it is often unfair. For example, terrorists may be Muslims, but Muslims are not necessarily terrorists, as some headlines have implied.   The Council urges publications to be aware of the sensitivities of groups about whom they are reporting. Headlines are a particular problem, given the need to capture the essence of a story within a limited compass, and require particular care.   In a September 2001 press release, the Council expressed its concern "about references to race, colour, ethnicity or nationality which promote negative stereotypes in the community". Similarly, the Council considers that the use of wide, too-general terms for religious or ethnic groups in headlines could contribute to the promotion of a negative stereotype of that group.   Even the use of headlines of the style "Muslim terror" and "Islamic bomb attack" would be best avoided as they can be seen to link religious belief and its adherents to deliberate acts of terror. The Muslim community has told the Press Council that it has already experienced the cumulative effect of the frequent use of the religious terms, which has led to increased divisions in Australian society and ostracising of citizens simply because they belong to a recognisable minority.   The Council appreciates that the problem extends to other religions, and to other groups whose standing may be tarnished by actions emanating from a minority of members, and therefore urges publications to be as narrow and focused as possible in their description of those responsible.   The Council also notes that full reports do not constitute as great a problem as headlines, since more accuracy can be achieved outside the limitations of headline space. However, both aspects of presentation need care.  

The Australian Press Council has from time to time received complaints about the terminology used to describe World War Two Nazi death camps that were situated in occupied Poland.   In May 1999, in Adjudication No. 1025, the Council upheld a complaint about the use of the term "Polish concentration camp" to describe them. The Council noted in that finding that such usage "would have been harmfully misleading to younger readers and others whose knowledge of the Second World War is hazy or non-existent".   The Council has now received a joint request from the Ambassadors to Australia of the Republic of Poland and the State of Israel that the media generally cease using the misleading term "Polish concentration camp", which they say is harmful to both communities in Australia and adversely impacts on Polish-Jewish relations in general.   In response to their request, the Press Council reiterates its conclusion from 1999 and seeks the cooperation of the print media in avoiding the potentially offensive terminology. A more accurate and appropriate description for the camps would be "Nazi concentration camps", adding their location as being "in occupied Poland" where necessary.  

The Press Council views with concern inadequately researched reports on health and medical matters appearing in the press and in the media as whole. The dangers of exciting unreasonable fears or hopes are far too great for anything but the most careful treatment.   The reporter/writer concerned may not be equipped to judge the value or otherwise of the reported treatments. Statements on efficacy should be treated with extreme care. They should always be sourced, even if made by the most eminent authority; on any lesser authority, they should be cross-checked with some other source. Claims of cures, wonder cures, near-miracles and the like should be clearly identified as just that, claims.   The standing and the disinterest, or lack of it, of those making the claims should be made clear, be they researchers, pharmaceutical companies or other salespeople. In cases where the writer is qualified to make judgment on the subject being reported, the qualification should be identified for the reader.   Personal experience or anecdotal evidence, too, should be clearly identified as such. The reader clearly has the right to ask: "Who says so?" The reports should provide the answer.   The Council recognises the undoubted public interest in health and medical matters, and the difficulties faced by the media in these areas.   A conservative, careful approach to health and medical reports is essential.  

The Press Council offers the following broad guidelines for newspapers’ consideration when reporting drug-related issues:

• Responsibly report public debate about drug use and addiction;
• The harmful effects of any particular drug should not be exaggerated or minimised;
• Avoid detailed accounts of consumption methods, even though many young people are generally familiar with them;
• Outlining the chemical composition of a drug may be justified in some reports, but avoid providing any details which could assist its manufacture;
• Do not quote the lethal dose of any particular drug;
• Guard against any reporting which might encourage readers’ experimentation with a drug, for example highlighting the ‘glamour’ of the dangers involved;
• Highlight elements of a story which convey the message that preventive measures against drug abuse do exist, and that people can be protected from the harmful consequences of their addictive behaviours;
• Bear in mind the arguments of those who point out that tobacco and alcohol use and addiction are another major aspect of the drug story.

 

Advertorial' is the term for newspaper and magazine content that looks like editorial content but is published under a commercial arrangement between an advertiser, promoter or sponsor of goods and/or services and the publisher.   Such commercial arrangements may include payment for articles to be published and undertakings that editorial content will be published in exchange for, or as part of, an agreement to place an advertisement or provide a sponsorship.   ‘Advertorials’ should be identified by such terms as "advertisement", "advertising feature", "special feature", "sponsored feature" and the like so that readers are not led to believe that their content is based on editorial news values free of commercial influences.   Advertorials’ are regarded as advertisements and will be covered by regulations and guidelines that apply to advertisements. Complaints to the Australian Press Council about ‘advertorials’ usually will be redirected to a relevant advertising or trade practices authority.   Where publication of material is not part of a commercial arrangement or not deemed to be ‘advertorial’, or is said to mislead readers as to its provenance, and is the subject of a complaint lodged with the Council, it will be dealt with under the Council's Standards of Practice.

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

1. Adjudication No. 1636 (April 2015).
2. Adjudication No. 1383 (January 2008)
3. Adjudication No. 1636 (April 2015); Adjudication No. 1383 (January 2008).
4. 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…”