Adjudication No. 255 (September 1985) [1985] APC 47

ADJUDICATION No. 255 (September 1985)

Father Noel McMaster of Brisbane complains of an article in The Daily Sun on April 9, 1985. The article, headed "Priest backs protest" purported to recount comments by Father McMaster on the actions of one of his parishioners, Mr Dowling, who had broken into a high security receiving station in an Army Barracks in Melbourne and daubed the slogan "Messenger of Death" on a column supporting a satellite dish. Father McMaster complains that the headline and the article misrepresent what he said to the reporter, and he objects to the use of his name in the article.

It appears that Mr Dowling's action had been reported in The Courier-Mail, where he had been described of West End in Brisbane and as a Catholic.

Mr E. Fitzmaurice, a reporter from The Daily News, rang the West End Presbytery in an endeavour to learn Mr Dowling's whereabouts. The phone was answered by Father McMaster, who gave the reporter such assistance as he could. Not long afterwards the reporter rang again and asked some questions arising out of the statement of Mr Dowling, reported in The Courier-Mail, that he had acted as a Christian. Again Father McMaster endeavoured to be helpful. He appreciated that Mr Fitzmaurice was a reporter who intended to write a story, but he was not told and did not understand that Mr Fitzmaurice was seeking to obtain an interview from him for publication. He saw the reporter as a person seeking help in understanding the Christian viewpoint on the matter, and he gave what help he could, but without any thought that it would be published as an interview with him. When at the end of the conversation the reporter asked him how he spelt his name, he replied that his name was not relevant and he did not expect to be part of the story at all.

In the circumstances the Press Council considers that it was unfair to publish the material as an interview with Father McMaster. He was not told that this was the basis of the conversation, and as soon as it was suggested he refused his consent. Such actions can only serve to make the public wary of the Press and unwilling to assist journalists in their inquiries.

The Council is also satisfied that the story as published gave a misleading picture of the attitudes expressed by Father McMaster. It has reached this conclusion with the benefit of a detailed written account of the conversation from the reporter and a personal discussion with Father McMaster. Father McMaster did not seek the interview or volunteer support for Mr Dowling's action, but in response to questions indicated that he accepted that Mr Dowling had acted as a Christian, that he did not condemn him, that he would welcome him back in to the church, and that Christians felt bound by a higher authority than the law of the land. He stressed that Mr Dowling was acting as an individual and independently of the church.

This understanding, compassionate and non-condemnatory attitude was quite different from that attributed to Father McMaster in the story. The headline was unfair in saying that he backed the protest. It was quite incorrect to say, as the first sentence of the story did, that he had "praised a member of his congregation for defacing army equipment in an anti-nuclear protest". Nor did he say that Mr Dowling "acted as a true Christian in the Sunday dawn raid".

The complaint is upheld.