Adjudication No. 770 (December 1994) [1994] APC 79

ADJUDICATION NO. 770 (December 1994)

While upholding in part a complaint by Michael Logan against The Australian newspaper, the Australian Press Council urges readers dissatisfied with something they read to attempt to have their say by a letter or statement to the paper.

In this case, Mr Logan complained that a headline, "RSL chief renews attack on gays", and some of the underlying article in The Australian's 1 September 1994 edition breached the Press Council principle against distorting the facts in text or headlines.

The Press Council agrees that the headline in particular was a distortion.

The National President of the RSL, Major-General "Digger" James was, in fact, attacking proposals to declare same-sex couples as families and was not attacking homosexuals or questioning the right of individuals to be homosexual.

Equally, earlier comments by the President which could justify the verb "renews", reporting his criticism of a government decision to allow gays into the defence forces, were about the decision, not an "attack" on gays.

The Press Council reiterates its concern that newspapers take particular care in composing headlines, especially on emotive issues like this one, where a public figure's meaning can too easily be misconstrued.

While the newspaper later said it was "unlikely" a letter from the complainant would have been published "given the pressure on the letters page", he made no attempt to send one.

Mr Logan informed the Press Council that he did not offer a letter because (a) newspapers are "very selective" in the letters they publish and that they eliminate letters which challenged minority groups and that (b) people reading the original article were unlikely to read the letters page.

The Press Council has no evidence that The Australian is selective about the letters it publishes in the way the complainant alleges.

It is also important for readers to realise that the letters pages are among the most widely read sections of newspapers.

The newspaper commented that Major-General James himself had not complained.

The point is not particularly relevant in this case. Public figures have numerous reasons for not complaining (including the possibility that they might have missed articles in question).

In any case, the Press Council's principles are as much about readers being given information fairly and accurately, as about the feelings of people quoted, misquoted or misinterpreted.