Adjudication No. 342 (August 1987) [1987] APC 29

ADJUDICATION No. 342 (August 1987)

The Coalition for Denmark's Environment complains about two articles published in the Albany Advertiser on March 31, 1987.

The Coalition alleges that the first article, headed "Chamber Discusses Denmark Water Problem" was inaccurate in several respects, including:

• a misleading headline;

• the title of a committee represented at a meeting convened by the Denmark Chamber of Commerce, reported in the article;

• the affiliation of another person attending the meeting;

• the nature of an invitation by the local Shire Council to the Chamber of Commerce, to convene the meeting.

In relation to the second article the Coalition complains about what it regards as:

• unfair editorial comment in the paper's correction of a report based on a news release issued by the Coalition;

• misleading information about the invitation list compiled by the Chamber of Commerce for its meeting.

The Albany Advertiser has responded to all these matters, either standing by the accuracy of its reporting, or offering an alternative explanation of the deficiencies alleged by the complainant. From the assertions and counter-assertions of either party, however, the Press Council finds it impossible to establish the true course of the events complained about.

The Coalition presented a draft apology for these perceived shortcomings for publication by the paper. The wording of the draft was strong and unequivocal on a number of matters which the paper disputed, and it was not published; indeed, it appears to the Press Council that the style of the proposed apology could have well have reinforced the paper's evident exasperation with the Coalition, and consequently the Coalition's fears of being the victim of a conspiracy to deny it expression of its views, and of bias by the newspaper.

The Press Council believes that the disputed matters could have been resolved satisfactorily by the publication of an appropriately worded letter to the editor from the Coalition. Complaints on similar issues are submitted regularly for adjudication, but the Council considers that mutual tolerance on the part of the press and community groups, and a willingness to accommodate each other's views, are a more effective means of furthering debate than a confrontation via the Complaints Committee of the Press Council.