Adjudication No. 935 (July 1997) [1997] APC 36

ADJUDICATION No. 935 (July 1997)

The Australian Press Council has dismissed a complaint by Ray Webber against the Toowoomba Chronicle over the non-publication of several letters written to the paper.

In his complaint, Mr Webber describes himself as "an avid and prolific" writer of letters relating to community issues. He says his letters are rarely printed even when other letter writers specifically refer to him, and he should therefore be entitled to the right of reply.

He adds that a 68-page paper relating to "Politics and Religion Enter the Toowoomba City Council Elections" which he submitted to the Toowoomba Chronicle received no response, and 22 bulletins deposited by him on behalf of the Toowoomba Residents' and Ratepayers' Association were not printed.

Mr Webber also claimed that the paper had adopted a policy of dropping honorifics in letters to the editor, a practice he found objectionable.

Mr Webber's main complaint centres on four letters he wrote in March and April this year on the subject of local government politics; and on removal of some phrases from a published letter without his consent.

In its response the paper said Mr Webber was indeed a prolific letter writer and had letters published frequently in the Chronicle. It supplied copies of letters from him published in 1997, and said that in the last three months of 1996 alone, 13 letters had been published.

The Chronicle said, however, that up to 30 letters to the editor were received on a normal day. All were read and considered, but the paper took its stance on previous rulings of the Press Council that editors have the right to exercise their discretion on whether or not to publish. The Chronicle exercised this prerogative without any qualms, and also reserved the right to make minor editorial changes provided they did not distort the meaning of the letter.

The Press Council observes from the material submitted that a lively debate on local government matters has been going on in the correspondence columns of the Chronicle, to which Mr Webber has been a very energetic contributor. His views have been thoroughly and vigorously aired on a number of occasions, and letters from other writers mentioning him make it clear the debate has been continuing for some time, without quarter being given on either side.

The Press Council's view is that in an ongoing debate the right of reply to every letter is not automatic, and the editor should be free to exercise his or her discretion. It sees no evidence of unfair treatment in this case.