Adjudication No. 754 (October 1994) [1994] APC 63

ADJUDICATION NO. 754 (October 1994)

In adjudicating on a complaint by The Eros Foundation against The Herald Sun, the Press Council restates its opinion that newspapers have a duty to ensure balance in matters of public debate.

The complaint makes a number of allegations. The Council has focused on two major concerns as identified by the complainant:

• that the newspaper in its reporting was biased against the sex industry; and

• that an article supplied by the complainant to the newspaper was not published, contrary to an alleged "promise" to do so by the newspaper.

In relation to (i), the complainant draws attention to articles, editorials, cartoons and the imbalance in letters to the editor over a two year period, with 104 out of 106 such letters "expressing derogatory or degrading statements about people who work in the sex industry". The newspaper disputes that it is biased against the sex industry. It claims that its editorials, at one time or another, have been critical of every industry, including the mining industry, the forestry industry and the racing industry. Where appropriate they have also praised these industries.

The newspaper maintains that it adopts a responsible approach to discussing a subject-matter and points out that the newspaper some years ago had run editorials advocating the legalisation of brothels. At the same time, they had advocated that governments should pay attention to the concerns of local residents, and had also expressed concerns about the processes by which brothels obtained permits. It denies that articles in the newspaper constitute an ongoing campaign against the sex industry, that its reporters are directed as to how they should write, or that cartoonists are instructed what to draw. The newspaper also points out that it does not receive many letters supporting activities relating to the "sex industry". The allegation of bias, in the Council's view, is not made out, and this aspect of the complaint is dismissed.

On issues of interest and importance to the community, it is legitimate for a newspaper to express strong views. Where such airing of views impinges on the interests of members of the community it is not unreasonable to expect a newspaper to provide opportunities for responses to be published. Determining what responses should be published is a matter of discretionary judgment on the part of the newspaper, provided the discretion is not exercised in an unreasonable manner. Whether an undertaking or "promise" was made by the newspaper to publish a response from the complainant is immaterial for, in this case, the Council is of the view that, given the nature of the article provided by the complainant, the discretion has been exercised reasonably.

Nevertheless, the Council believes the newspaper could have negotiated with The Eros Foundation towards the submission of a publishable article. To the extent that it did not, the complaint is upheld.