Adjudication No. 835 (January 1996) [1996] APC 8

ADJUDICATION No. 835 (January 1996)

The Australian Press Council has dismissed a complaint against The Sun[Dhatch]Herald for two articles published in the motoring page on 1 October 1995. Anthony Wreford complains that the articles are biased and represent the views of the Australian Automobile Association (AAA), an organisation with vested interests. He further claims that relevant facts have been suppressed resulting in an unbalanced report. Mr Wreford also states that the material in the article headlined "Political Price Keeps Old Cars Alive" does not support the headline.

The article "The Big Ask" states "the AAA research is among the most extensive carried out on motorists' priorities and attitudes". The writer uses the research supported by statistics and a point system survey to report motorists' views on safer cars, the environment, protection of the Australian car industry, petrol taxes and their use. The writer draws the conclusion that "Australian motorists emerge as a politically correct but contradictory bunch". The article does not breach Australian Press Council principles.

Under the headline, "Political price keeps old cars alive", the writer is forthright in condemning the effects of old vehicles on the environment. He also uses the AAA research to reveal how Australian motorists are quick to defend their old vehicles. He compares the problem of old vehicles in Australia with parts of the US and Europe. The article states that several countries have run campaigns to entice old car owners to trade up, one recent one in Britain "immediately triggered outrage".

The average age of Australian cars is 10.4 years. Based on the content of the article a large proportion of voters would resent any political attempt to remove old cars off the road. "Political price keeps old cars alive" is an acceptable headline.

The contents of the article do not offend Press Council principles. The writer uses research reports and opinion to develop his conclusion: "The real issue on old cars is whether a skinny wallet automatically confers the right to drive one old banger around that produced as much tailpipe halitosis as 380 new cars."

Mr Wreford, in writing to the newspaper stated, "I have no objection to the material you have published. My complaint is that you offer no balance even though a strong case can be made for a contrary point of view".

Mr Wreford complains that his letter to the motoring editor "in the interest of balance" was not published. He later declined an offer from the newspaper to submit a briefer letter expressing his views on old cars. The newspaper defends itself by stating that it cannot give every reader the right to lengthy reply just because he or she has a different point of view from its writer. A succinct letter from Mr Wreford would have provided some balance to the report.