Adjudication No. 359 (February 1988) [1988] APC 6

ADJUDICATION No. 359 (February 1988)

Mr C G Iles of Mitsubishi Motors Australia Ltd complains to the Press Council concerning an article entitled "End of the road for popular cars" by Lim Say Boon which highlighted the fact that there are few locally manufactured cars which are over the government's car plan minimum production number of 30,000 units per annum. This contained a number of tables - models ensured of survival, doubtful models, models due to go out of production and models recently put out of production.

Mitsubishi argues that the numbers printed in the table incorporated a fundamental error which resulted in false conclusions drawn in the article, particularly in the case of the Mitsubishi Magna which was listed as a doubtful model. If this were corrected, Mitsubishi would be in the four vehicles reaching the 30,000 unit goal in 1986 and among the three achieving this in 1987. Mitsubishi made strong representations by telephone and by letter requesting correction. Subsequently, The Australian agreed that there had been a miscalculation and an article was instructed to set the record straight. On 9 December The Australian published an article entitled "Big-six car sales up despite downturn". Concerning the Magna, it reports:

Significantly, in the medium car market, the Magna, which has been promoted as a roomy, four cylinder alternative to the big, six-cylinder family car, has so far been completely unscathed by the market downturn.

Despite a 13.7 per cent downturn in the medium car market, Mitsubishi is confident it will sell by the end of the year 1500 more Magnas than last year.

If its prediction is borne out, the Mitsubishi Magna should emerge as one of the six models allowed to continue local production under the Government's plan to rationalise car-making.

Mitsubishi states it was surprised to learn that this article aimed to compensate Mitsubishi and feels that this in no way resolves the matter. Obviously, Mitsubishi expected that there would be some statement in the article specifically correcting the error contained in the early article.

The Press Council believes that the second article should have referred to the error in the earlier article, and presented a correct table for the benefit of the public. This would have been much fairer to Mitsubishi, which rightly objects to the Magna model being wrongly labelled as having a doubtful future.

The complaint is upheld.