Adjudication No. 499 (June 1991) [1991] APC 33

ADJUDICATION No. 499 (June 1991)

Newspapers have an obligation to present fairly all sides of contentious issues in their news and letters columns.

The Australian Press Council believes, however, this principle was not breached in a case involving the Parramatta Advertiser because, as is so often the case under Australian law, the paper felt unable to publish the views of a participant in the story due to legal constraints.

Mr Philip Howell, a Parramatta resident and local branch member of the Australian Labor Party, complained about the combined effect of an editorial headlined "Oops! They missed the vote", plus the report that provoked it in the 27 March 1991 edition of the Parramatta Advertiser. He said that if only the news report had been published, he would not have complained.

Commenting on the article which reported that endorsed ALP candidate for the NSW state election John Haines had been "dumped" by the party, the paper's editorial said among other things that "a disenchanted 'inside' element" had pointed the finger at Haines and that they were "limp opportunists".

In a letter to the editor, Mr Howell claimed the discarded candidate did know why he was dumped.

Replying to Mr Howell's letter, the editor said he had been advised that the letter "may be actionable under the existing defamation laws" and on that basis he was not prepared to publish the letter or a suggested slightly amended version of it in his paper o

Mr Howell makes valid points about readers' rights to know the full details of significant local political stories.

But in this case the Press Council believes there were significant legal risks for the paper if it published Mr Howell's letter in the form he wrote it.

Possibly the complainant could have negotiated a compromise statement or letter with the editor which could have overcome the problem. But on the basis of what was put before it the Press Council dismisses the complaint.