Search

Senate Environment and Communications References Committee – Media Diversity in Australia Inquiry

 

APC Opening Statement

 

Introduction

  Thank you for the invitation to attend today.   The Press Council has made a submission to this inquiry, and I won’t repeat its content now. Rather, I’d like to make some more general observations, based in part on issues raised in earlier hearings of this inquiry.   It’s essential in a democracy that the Press is free to make available to the Australian people a wide diversity of views and opinions, to hold Government, business and community leaders accountable, to protect the public’s right to know, and to be a trusted source of news in a world of competing sources of information, and in some cases, misinformation.   Meeting this objective requires high standards of editorial and journalistic practices. More than ever people need to be able to access reliable and accurate news. News that is relevant to them whether they live in the city, in regional or rural areas.   Publisher members of the Press Council commit to be bound by high media standards, and to an independent complaints handling system. At this critical juncture, there’s a heightened need for independent selfregulation of the media, as consumers of news need to be assured that complaints about breaches are assessed independently of Government and Publishers. The Press Council meets this need and will continue to do so, by evolving, exploring partnerships and embracing opportunities and challenges. The Press Council has a diversity of Publisher members - around 30.   Publisher members include community, rural and Indigenous Publishers, a number of online-only publications, as well as the very large publishing groups. Under this self-regulatory system, the costs of the Press Council are met by Publisher members. There are, however, strong safeguards embedded in the Press Council Constitution to enhance the financial security of the Press Council and ensure its independence from all constituent/Publisher members, whether large or small.   These include the fact that a constituent member has to give four years’ notice of resignation from the Press Council and is required to meet its financial obligations to the Press Council for three years following its notice of resignation. This change, which was introduced in 2012, ensures that a large Publisher cannot threaten the Press Council by immediate cessation of funding.   The Constitution requires a majority of Press Council members to be independent of Publisher members. Public members are drawn from varying walks of life and have not had previous connections (or any recent and significant connections) with the media. In addition, the Press Council has independent journalist members who have no current links with Publishers. Critically, Publisher members do not sit on Adjudication Panels. The Press Council’s Adjudication Panels are tasked to decide whether there has been a breach of the Press Council’s Standards of Practice. They typically comprise 5 members drawn from public members and independent journalists.   By drawing on a range of independent community members and journalists, Adjudication Panels provide a level of diversity and experience not always achieved by other bodies or models that are similarly tasked to consider breaches of standards.   The Press Council sets binding Standards of Practice. They are contained in its General Principles, a statement of Privacy Principles and two specific Standards governing the coverage of suicide and contacting patients in hospitals. The Press Council also develops Advisory Guidelines on a range of important issues following community and stakeholder consultation.   The Press Council accepts complaints from Primary Complainants (where they consider they have been personally affected by a possible breach of Council standards) and from Secondary Complainants (who, while not directly affected, are able to raise concerns that particular articles may have breached Council standards).   In the case of Primary Complainants, Press Council staff are able in many cases to negotiate a suitable remedy with the Publication that meets the concerns of Complainants. For example, this may be a correction in the Publication, right of reply or an apology by the Publication. In this way a complainant has access to a free, independent and impartial service to address their concerns and this can be a far better alternative than costly litigation.   While the Press Council does not have the power to levy financial penalties, its Adjudications must be published by Publications (in a prominent position within their Publications) and adverse findings are not enjoyed by either journalists or the Publication. The value of a published Adjudication that upholds or partially upholds a complaint cannot be overstated from a Complainant’s perspective. A combination of published Adjudications and comprehensive Standards of Practice and Advisory Guidelines drive higher journalistic standards.    

Looking ahead

  While the Press Council plays an integral part in maintaining high journalist standards and public confidence in the media, there are areas where it could do better. The complaints handling system, while robust, is too slow for the modern world. One of my priorities as the new CEO is to make it faster. The Press Council is committed to further increasing the diversity of its Council and Adjudication Panel membership. It is currently in the process of a recruitment drive (for public and independent journalist members) – which has this factor - as well as others - very much in mind.   Most importantly there is a need for all stakeholders, including the Press Council, to address emerging issues in the media environment. These include dealing with convergence, where similar content on different platforms can be subject to different regulatory regimes, and the emergence of digital platforms, which have disrupted the traditional revenue model of Publishers and which disseminate stories through their own channels that are not part of any established regulatory system.   The Press Council looks forward to continuing to engage with existing and emerging stakeholders, and to contribute to the discourse on media diversity in a cross-platform media environment.

The Press Council has made a submission to this inquiry, and I won’t repeat its content now. Rather, I’d like to make some more general observations, based in part on issues raised in earlier hearings of this inquiry.

Note: The Australian Press Council has kept this response within what it understands to be the very limited scope of comment sought by the Committee at this stage on the principles and policy considerations proposed in the Framing Paper. Its substantive views on specific aspects of regulation of convergent media will be provided in accordance with the Committee’s subsequent processes.  

A proposal for an additional Principle

The principles should give specific attention to the importance of providing Australians with ready access to sources of news and opinion which comply with adequate core standards of accuracy, fairness, balance, integrity, civility and responsibility. These core standards are of such fundamental importance to the general public interest, including the maintenance of democratic governance, that they should be included specifically in the principles. It is not sufficient to rely on them being partially implied, perhaps, in the references to “diversity” (Principle 1) and “community standards and the views and expectations of the Australian public” (Principle 5). Indeed, they can be jeopardised by undue emphasis on those considerations. Explicit mention at this high level of policy development is also necessary because the opportunities and challenges of convergence are already having profound impacts on the observance of the core standards by new entrants as well as longer-established participants. Appropriately adjusted regulation will be essential to maximise the future benefits and minimise the adverse impacts. Accordingly the Press Council proposes inclusion of the following principle after the current principle 6: In particular, the provision of news and opinion through these services should be subject to adequate standards of accuracy, fairness, balance, integrity, civility and responsibility. OR In particular, the provision of news and opinion through these services should be subject to standards which adequately reflect the public interest in accuracy, fairness, balance, integrity, civility and responsibility.  

Issues arising from the current Principles

Principles 1-5: Compliance with these principles will require ready availability of a wide range of news and opinion from international, national and local sources which is not unduly constrained by governments or other powerful interests. Principle 6: Compliance with this principle must strike an appropriate balance between the needs of highly specialised and well-resourced consumers and the preservation of ready access to core services for people of modest means or broader interests.  

Comments on the “other policy considerations”

Issue: The impact of legislative and regulatory frameworks outside the Minister’s portfolio that may impact on issues within the scope of the review: The Council notes, in particular, its own system of developing and promulgating standards for publication of news and opinion, and of mediating and adjudicating on complaints about alleged breaches of those standards. Its non-statutory jurisdiction embraces all major print outlets in Australia and their associated websites. Issues: Appropriate ways to treat content sourced from outside Australia; International approaches and Australia’s international obligations: In principle, standards of reporting should not vary according to the geographical source. Difficulties of enforcement should not be regarded as necessarily precluding worthwhile regulation, especially in light of possible advances in technology and international cooperation.  

The submission to the Independent Inquiry into Media and Media Regulation describes progress to date in each of a number of key areas that are part of a sustained program of reform by the Australian Press Council, commenced in early 2010.

Letter from the Press Council Chair, Professor Julian Disney, responding to questions from the Chair of the Independent Media Inquiry, Mr Ray Finkelstein QC.

  Letter from Mr Finkelstein to Prof Disney View PDF   Response from Prof Disney View PDF  

The Convergence Review released its detailed discussion papers in September 2011. The Council's submission principally relates to the issues raised in the Community Standards paper.

Response to the recommendations set out in the Interim Report, principally the recommendations concerning Content Standards and the new regulator.