Adjudication No. 1066 (January 2000) [2000] APC 1

ADJUDICATION No. 1066 (January 2000)

The Press Council has dismissed the main thrust of complaints by the Federation of Parents and Citizens' Associations of New South Wales (the Federation) arising out of a series of articles published by The Daily Telegraph in August 1999, but upheld its complaint about the inadequate balance given to the Federation in response.

Between 9 and 13 August 1999 the paper published a series of articles, commentary pieces and an editorial that were very critical of the Federation and in particular the actions of the President of the Federation, Ms Bev Baker. The paper claimed that the Federation was no longer in touch with the views of parents and had become too much of a political body. It was claimed that the Federation's views on suspension or expulsion of students for the use of drugs in schools, its attitude to verbal abuse of teachers by students, and its encouragement of students absenting themselves from school to attend demonstrations were out of line with the views of parents. In support of its claims, the newspaper published the results of a survey of parents that it had commissioned and also comments critical of the Federation made by, among others, the Director-General of Education.

The Federation complained that the survey was simplistic in its presentation of the issues on which opinion was sought and did not accurately state the views of the Federation. It also claimed that the newspaper, in its presentation of what purported to be facts, misrepresented the effect of the responses to the survey and also presented opinion as fact. The Federation was critical of the publication of personal details relating to Ms Baker.

Ms Baker was interviewed by a journalist from the paper some 2 months before the articles that were the subject of the complaint were written. The content of the subsequently conducted survey was not put to her nor was she invited to comment specifically on the criticisms that were made about her and the Federation in the articles. On 14 August, after the last of the articles, the paper published an unfairly edited version of a letter that Ms Baker sent to it on 10 August in response to the first in the series of articles.

The Council considers that the general subject of the articles was a matter of public interest. The paper was justified in airing the issues that it did and taking a position on those issues. It could be expected that not all parents would agree with the views of the Federation while others would differ from the attitudes expressed by the paper.

However, on matters as controversial as those dealt with in the articles, and in the light of the strong criticism that the newspaper was making of the Federation and its President, it should have been prepared to give the Federation the opportunity to put its side of the argument clearly, either in the original article or as soon as possible thereafter. In the end, it published a delayed and heavily edited version of the President's response. To this extent the complaint is upheld.

The Council considers that where a newspaper enters upon a campaign directed at a public body it is under an obligation to provide the body with a reasonable and swift opportunity to put its side of the story.