Adjudication No. 771 (January 1995; Re-issued, in an amended form, February 1995) [1995] APC 1

ADJUDICATION No. 771 (January 1995; Re-issued, in an amended form, February 1995)

This adjudication was originally issued on 20 January 1995. The newspaper appealed on the ground that it had not understood that there were two complaints, not one. Having accepted that the newspaper had reasonable grounds, the Council reconsidered and revised one aspect of its adjudication. As a result, certain changes have been made to paragraph 3 and a new paragraph 4 has been inserted.

The Press Council has upheld complaints made by sporting official Arthur Tunstall against the Daily Telegraph-Mirror over a news report on an incident during the Commonwealth Games in Canada and a later feature profile on him.

The incident involved a reporter from a London paper who wrote that while trying to interview Mr Tunstall, the Australian Chef-de-mission at the Games, "he thumped and punched me; he pushed and shoved me; he threatened me". This followed Mr Tunstall's widely reported remarks on disabled athletes at the Games.

The incident was shown extensively on TV where the impression was given that it was Mr Tunstall who was under threat, not the reporter. Mr Tunstall said that the reporter had denied the original report and was so reported in the Canadian press. The reporter, however, insists that the incident took place as reported and says Mr Tunstall's assertion of her denial resulted from his misreading of a gossip-column item. The Daily Telegraph-Mirror had front-page coverage of the incident on 18 August 1994. A news report published on 19 August 1994 (which is the news report cited in the complaint) gave, in detail and with accompanying photographs, the British reporter's version of the incident. The Daily Telegraph-Mirror attempted to obtain further interviews with Mr Tunstall. He understandably referred them to the press liaison officer. As a result, Mr Tunstall's response, while sought, was not published. Four witnesses of the event, including the Vice-President of the Commonwealth Games Federation and an Australian television producer, have informed the Council that Mr Tunstall did not assault the reporter.

Nevertheless, the impression left by the 19 August news report was that Mr Tunstall had assaulted the reporter. This now needs to be redressed, and damage to Mr Tunstall's reputation restored. The prominent publication of this adjudication should assist in this correction.

The second complaint from Mr Tunstall covered 21 points of alleged error in a profile on him which appeared under the headline "Arthur's sporting strife". This followed both his remarks on disabled athletes and his objecting to runner Cathy Freeman carrying the Aboriginal flag after winning her races.

It would be tedious to detail every point. Certainly there are errors, and the writer of the profile claims that they arise from the files used by him as the basis for his feature; he says that Mr Tunstall refused his repeated requests for an interview and thus the file references could not be checked. Mr Tunstall denies that he was approached for an interview.

Some of the errors are of little importance, and some of the incidents recorded can easily have differing interpretations. However the overall impression is that the article supported the reported critics' description of Mr Tunstall as "a bumbling old fool" whose manner and methods were archaic. Several points in Mr Tunstall's favour are made, but they are heavily outweighed by the negative.

The Press Council believes that overall Mr Tunstall was not treated fairly in the profile.

In making this adjudication, the Council considers that many media outlets in Australia went overboard in their reporting of the words and actions of Mr Tunstall at the Games. His remarks inevitably provoked a vigorous response, but the wave of criticism that washed over him, while not entirely engendered, was certainly forced on its way by a wolf-pack of outrage.

Did no one support him in his positions? That seems unlikely given that he has since been re-elected President of the NSW Commonwealth Games Association, and elected Vice President of the Commonwealth Games Federation. With the exception of Stuart Littlemore's Media Watch and some press and radio commentators, little was said in his favour in the media during the furore.

The Press Council believes that, no matter how outrageous statements or actions may appear to be, the supporting and contrary points of view should always be considered and even sought.

It is all too easy to run with the pack; it is a fault the press and the media in general should guard against.