Adjudication No. 596 (September 1992) [1992] APC 66

ADJUDICATION No. 596 (September 1992)

The Australian Press Council has carefully considered complaints against the Adelaide Sunday Mail over the publication on its front page of 12 July of a large photograph of a dead child, one of seven members of two related families who were washed from the rocks by a freak wave and drowned at Kiama on the NSW coast.

The Council notes the concern of the complainants, whose views would be representative of a wide section of the public. Those views need to be considered carefully by the media.

The use of photographs of persons involved in accidents, tragedies, and other occasions of private grief, particularly where the suffering of those most immediately concerned will be exacerbated by the publication, should not be undertaken lightly. There should be a compelling and over-riding public interest in their publication.

A consideration for newspapers must be the likelihood of persons close to those identified in photographs involving tragedy and grief actually seeing the publication. The greater the likelihood, the weightier the public interest must be before a decision to publish is taken.

Thus, the publication of scenes from wars and tragedies in other lands identifying individuals is more acceptable. The use of photographs of atrocities in wartime, or the horrors of famine can raise legitimate issues of local concern, for example, whether we should be involved in assistance or in some intervention, if only diplomatic.

The Press Council notes that in this case the newspaper reacted promptly and properly to public distress by publishing five letters to the editor criticising its handling of the tragedy. It also accepts that there was a legitimate reason for dramatising the Kiama tragedy, in that similar ocean swells sometimes occur at popular South Australian coastal resorts. (The newspaper subsequently published a map identifying such danger spots.)

There was a strong public interest in the story, which tends to outweigh the impact on the sensibilities of the public at large.

In these circumstances, the Council does not uphold the complaint.