Adjudication No. 1212 (September 2003) [2003] APC 28

Adjudication No. 1212 (September 2003)

The Australian Press Council has dismissed a complaint against The Australian newspaper alleging bias in its coverage of the pressure being applied by the United States to Syria for its alleged role in the war against Iraq.

The complainant, Michael Norton, took issue with articles in The Australian of 15 April, under the headline Now US puts heat on Syria, and 16 April, under the headline US eyes on Syria's new President. The articles reported questions raised by the US about Syria's stance during the Iraq war.

Mr Norton said the articles were biased against Syria and contained no balance. In a letter of complaint to the newspaper, Mr Norton supported his claims with word counts of the two articles. The first article, he said, contained 47 lines critical of Syria and only six in its defence. The second article contained around 40 lines critical of Syria and only 3 lines in its favour.

Mr Norton said he did not receive a reply to his letter of complaint. He conceded that he did not expect, nor did he ask for, his letter to be published.

The complaint has to be viewed in the context of the war itself - press coverage appeared daily from the start of the Iraq campaign and continues. Claims and counter-claims abound.

Questions about Syria's involvement or otherwise were an issue for a short period, raised by the US President George W Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

The Australian said its articles did not aim to be report cards on who was right, just what was the main news on those days, which in the case of the articles in question was the pressure being exerted by the US on Syria.

The 15 April article reported US allegations that Syria had chemical weapons and that prominent Iraqi regime figures were fleeing to Syria. The article included a denial of the allegations by Syria's deputy ambassador to the US.

The 16 April article reported the US was putting more pressure on Syria to turn over fleeing Iraqi leaders and accusing Syria of testing chemical weapons. It also said that questions had been raised about America's approach, notably comments from United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan and British Prime Minister Tony Blair which appeared to be at odds with the US position.

While it is true that the Syrian denials occupied only a few lines in the two articles, it is unreasonable to expect equal space in news coverage for opposing views to those being expressed by others. This does not necessarily imply, as Mr Norton suggests, that a paper is favouring one party in dispute.

The material complained of did not contain the newspaper's own views, nevertheless the way was open for the complainant to express his views by submitting for possible publication a letter to the editor.

The Press Council does not find that its principles have been breached and the complaint is dismissed.