Adjudication No. 259 (October 1985) [1985] APC 51

ADJUDICATION No. 259 (October 1985)

The Right to Life Victoria complains about the reporting by three Melbourne newspapers of an incident when the Premier of Victoria, Mr Cain, and his wife were jostled while entering a church hall for an election meeting on February 27, 1985. The complaint is against the attribution of responsibility for what happened to members of the association, who were conducting a demonstration outside the hall when the Cains arrived.

The association has invited the Press Council, with the aid of television film, to determine what actually happened on the night in question, claiming that this will exonerate its members. However, the function of the Council is a different one -- to determine whether or not a newspaper has observed the standards of a responsible Press. The Press is not under a duty to be infallibly right in reporting the news; that is a gift not given to any mortal. The relevant duties of the Press are to be scrupulously honest and fair; to take all steps reasonably available to it to ensure the truth and exactness of its statements; to correct published information found to be harmfully wrong; and to give reasonable opportunity to reply to detrimental material if fairness so requires. The Council is concerned to make a finding about what actually happened in disputed situations only so far as such a finding may cast light on whether a paper has carried out its obligations.

We therefore consider in the first instance what the three papers and their representatives did. Although television and radio reporters were at the hall, there were no Press reporters there at the time of the disputed events, and the papers had to gather the story from secondary sources.

The Sun learnt of the incident from the 10 pm ABC news. The Chief of Staff assigned a State rounds reporter and a police rounds reporter to try to confirm the story by phone. The published story was a composite of their work. Those they spoke to included the Premier, a member of his staff and the ALP State Secretary who were with him, police, an official of the church where the demonstration took place, a Right to Life demonstrator, and the President of Right to Life (who however had not been present). Given the hour of night and the limited time, it was quite a thorough investigation. Seven people who had been present confirmed that Mr and Mrs Cain had been pushed and jostled, and at least five blamed the Right to Life demonstrators for the violence.

The story published by The Sun next morning under the heading "Demo fright for Cains" began:

Premier Cain and his wife, Nancye, were manhandled by hostile demonstrators during wild scenes at a public meeting last night. Mrs Cain was in tears after being pushed and jostled by a yelling crowd of about 30 Right to Life demonstrators ...

The story recounted an incident with Mr Frank Penhalluriack, a rebel weekend trader whose attempt to serve a subpoena on Mr Cain led to a scuffle, and quoted him, and also the Premier, his accompanying staff member, the ALP State Secretary, and a leader of the Right to Life demonstration, who claimed to have been injured herself and expressed her dislike of violence.

The Press Council, while unable to say whether the story was completely correct, is satisfied that it was written after a proper use of the opportunities for inquiry available at the time, and that any conclusions published were reached honestly and reasonably on the material available. If the story is wrong, it is not because of any breach of duty by The Sun.

There was no refusal by the paper to publish the association's version of the facts. The television film supplied supports some of the points made by the complainant, but leaves other matters in doubt, and does not clearly establish such error on the part of the paper as to place it under a duty to publish a correction. The complaint against The Sun is therefore dismissed.

The story published by The Herald the following afternoon was also based on interviews with witnesses. It contained the statement that "Mrs Cain burst into tears after being pushed and jostled by a yelling crowd of about 30 Right to Life demonstrators". No less than a quarter of the story was devoted to reporting a reply by the Right to Life. As with The Sun, the Council has no basis for concluding that The Herald fell short of proper standards. The complaint against The Herald is therefore dismissed.

The story in The Age of February 28 was also compiled from interviews, an Age reporter having arrived at the scene shortly after the disputed incident. The heading read "Cains jostled as abortion protest sparks violence", the first paragraph saying that Mr and Mrs Cain "were jeered at and jostled during a Right to Life demonstration". It carried a version of the events given by the leader of the Right to Life demonstration. For reasons similar to those already given in relation to The Sun and The Herald, the complaint against The Age is also dismissed.

To avoid any misunderstanding, the Press Council emphasises that it has not made any finding about the conduct of the Right to Life demonstrators. It has simply concluded that the papers committed no breach of their duties, inasmuch as, faced with the problem of reporting an event of public interest at which their reporters had not been present, they made inquiries that were reasonable in the circumstances, published conclusions they honestly came to as a result of their investigations, and published also the accounts given to them by the complainant.