Adjudication No. 758 (October 1994) [1994] APC 67

ADJUDICATION No. 758 (October 1994)

The Australian Press Council has dismissed complaints made by David Simpson about three articles which appeared in The Sydney Morning Herald on three separate days in April this year.

One of the articles was a by-line column piece by commentator Gerard Henderson. Another was a by-line article by the Herald's European correspondent, Peter Ellingsen. The third was a straight report from London about statements attributed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Carey.

What linked these complaints - in fact, at the heart of these complaints - was Mr Simpson's view that these articles were consistent examples of the Herald's "anglophobia", dishonest propaganda to denigrate Britain, and that they contained misrepresentations and distortions of fact.

The commentary by Gerard Henderson was mainly in praise of Australia's multicultural successes. It noted that a British-born journalist, who had spent years reporting on Australia for the BBC and The Times, had made a TV documentary outlining the virtues of Australia's migration programs and noting that the Japanese Government was examining the Australian success as a possible model for assisting minorities in Japan.

The final paragraph of a long article contained the only reference to Britain. It suggested that any Australian who believed immigration and multiculturalism were at the root of all Australia's problems "should have a look at contemporary Britain. It has few immigrants and no multicultural programs. Yet Britain is a nation in manifest decline".

Mr Simpson contended this was not a fact but was "the view of someone with a well established racist view ...".

The Press Council finds, to the contrary, that it was the honest and fair view of a noted commentator, and that, though these views might not suit everybody, the Press Council asserts the fundamental right of free expression and the contest of ideas as a normal responsibility of the press.

As to the article by Mr Ellingsen, he was describing the malaise of Britain as perceived by the British themselves, the growth of poverty and violence, and the increasing level of concern about these issues.

It would be odd indeed, in the view of the Press Council, if issues constantly aired by major British commentators and widely discussed in British newspapers should somehow be forbidden territory for an Australian newspaper.

Mr Simpson's third complaint is that an article in the Herald, reporting an article in Britain's Daily Telegraph, was not an accurate account of comments by the Archbishop of Canterbury and that the headline was an inaccurate representation of the Archbishop's remarks.

The Archbishop was reported as saying that Britain was now "an ordinary little nation" with deep class divisions and mediocre education, had lost much of its naval and air strength, and was a fragmented, divided society now largely isolated in the world.

The Herald heading was: "UK a nobody, prelate laments".

The Press Council finds no reason to condemn this heading and accepts the view of the Herald that it had no reason at the time to doubt the veracity of the report by The Daily Telegraph in London.