PUBLIC REPORT ON AUDIENCE COMMENTS AND
COMPLAINTS
JANUARY – MARCH 2003
1.
ABC Complaint Handling Procedures
The ABC is responsible for the quality and standards of all programs on its services.
With so many program services being provided each day, from time to time errors may occur.
The ABC aims to ensure that they happen as rarely as possible. However, should they occur,
the ABC accepts responsibility and will respond promptly and appropriately.
The ABC, through it’s Corporate Affairs Division, aims to respond to complaints as quickly as
possible and no later than 28 days after receipt of a complaint.
The roles of the Division’s Audience & Consumer Affairs and the ABC’s Complaints Review
Executive are described below.
Audience & Consumer Affairs
Audience & Consumer Affairs, which is independent of program making divisions within the
ABC, deals with written complaints about ABC programs.
Depending on the nature of the complaint, it will either be investigated by Audience &
Consumer Affairs or referred to the relevant division for direct response. All written
complaints alleging a breach of the ABC’s Editorial Policies will be investigated by Audience &
Consumer Affairs.
Complaints can be sent to ABC Audience & Consumer Affairs at GPO Box 9994 in your
capital city, or submitted by email to [email protected].
If a complainant expresses dissatisfaction with a response received from Audience &
Consumer Affairs, the complaint and response will be forwarded to the ABC’s Complaints
Review Executive (CRE) for independent review.
Complaints Review Executive
The role of Complaints Review Executive (CRE) was established to provide an additional
level of internal review for complainants who express dissatisfaction with ABC Audience &
Consumer Affairs’ response to their complaint.
The CRE has broad scope to independently review the broadcast and the manner in which
the complaint was originally dealt with, and determine whether the ABC acted appropriately.
The CRE is independent of both ABC Audience & Consumer Affairs and all program makers.
This additional tier of internal review does not preclude complainants from seeking external
review via the Australian Broadcasting Authority, or the ABC’s Independent Complaints
Review Panel, depending on the nature of the complaint. Both these forms of review are
external and entirely independent of the ABC.
2.
Overview
This report provides information about audience complaints finalised by ABC Audience &
Consumer Affairs and the ABC’s Complaints Review Executive between 1 January and 31
March 2003.
Specifically, the report outlines
•
the overall composition of audience contacts
•
timeliness of ABC responses
•
the subject matter of complaints received
•
the number of complaints upheld by the ABC
Overall, there were 4057 contacts finalised during this period. Of these, the clear majority
were appreciative and only 1457 (or 36%) were complaints. Of these complaints, 49 were
upheld either fully or partially. This represents 3.4% of all complaints, or 1.2% of all contacts
to the ABC, which were finalised during this period.
Overall composition of audience contacts
Between 1 January and 31 March 2003, ABC Audience & Consumer Affairs dealt with 4,057
written contacts from audience members.
Table 1: Written contacts finalised, 1 January to 31 March 2003.
Type of contact
Email
Letter
Total
% of Total
Complaint
972
485
1457
36%
Appreciation / Request /
Suggestion
1995
453
2448
60%
83
69
152
4%
3050
1007
4057
100%
Other contacts
Grand Total
Timeliness of responses
Table 2: Timeliness of responses provided, 1 January to 31 March 2003.
Type of contact
Complaint
All written contacts
Average response time
16 days
14 days
% of responses provided
within 28 days
82%
90%
Subject matter of complaints received
From 1 January to 31 March 2003, Audience & Consumer Affairs dealt with 1,457 complaints.
Topics of complaint were as follows:
Table 3: Topics of complaints finalised
Subject
% of
Number of complaints
complaints
finalised
Matters of fairness, accuracy and independence
Party political bias
News values / News content
Factual inaccuracy
Lack of balance
Unfair treatment
Discrimination
Harm to individuals / organisations featured in programs
Racism
Incidental advertising
Sexism
Invasion of privacy
Other bias
157
108
54
50
23
15
12
10
8
2
1
68
10.8%
7.4%
3.7%
3.4%
1.6%
1.0%
0.8%
0.7%
0.5%
0.1%
0.1%
4.7%
Matters of taste and standards
Scheduling / program changes
Quality - general
Standards of interviewing / presentation
Offence to religious feeling
Sex and sexuality
Poor taste
Program classifications
Language - pronunciation / grammar
Bad language
Sensitivity and portrayal
Bad example
Violence
367
148
80
42
41
22
18
18
16
13
10
6
25.2%
10.2%
5.5%
2.9%
2.8%
1.5%
1.2%
1.2%
1.1%
0.9%
0.7%
0.4%
Other
Promotions - ABC programs and products
Customer service / complaints handling
Management issues
Transmission
Internet - technical difficulties
Captions
Other
39
36
13
11
10
2
57
2.7%
2.5%
0.9%
0.8%
0.7%
0.1%
3.9%
1457
100.0%
Grand Total
Number of complaints upheld
During the period 1 January to 31 March 2003, 49 complaints were upheld either fully or
partially – 3.4% of the total complaints finalised; 1.2% of the total contacts finalised.
3.
Summary of complaints upheld by the ABC
The following summary provides details of all complaints finalised by the ABC’s Audience &
Consumer Affairs unit between 1 January and 31 March 2003 where the complaint was either
fully or partially upheld. The extent to which the complaint was upheld is indicated in each
summary. In all cases, the complainant received a written response outlining the ABC’s
findings.
(i) Matters of fairness, accuracy and independence
•
A viewer complained that an episode of Order in the House incorrectly attributed a
Shaw quote to Churchill and unfairly criticised Simon Crean for misquoting
Shakespeare. We acknowledged the misattribution of the Shaw quote and apologised
for this error. The complaint of unfair criticism of Simon Crean was not upheld and the
viewer was provided with an extract from the program transcript which demonstrated
this.
•
A viewer complained that the ABC’s NSW television news failed to adequately cover the
Victorian election and suggested that this was because the ABC was biased in favour of
the Liberal Party. We accepted as a fair and reasonable complaint that there was in
fact very little coverage of the Victorian election on the 7.00pm TV News in NSW apart
from the actual day of the election. Other ABC news services had, however, provided
more detailed coverage. We didn’t accept the viewer’s claim that the lack of coverage
was due to pro-Liberal bias on the part of the ABC.
•
A viewer complained that reports of the Sydney to Hobart Yacht Race were using the
name “Shockwave” to identify one of the participating yachts, and not its current name,
“Alfa Romeo”. We agreed that in this case, our broadcasters were inconsistent,
creating an element of confusion for the audience.
A listener complained that a radio news bulletin referred to Palestinians convicted of
crimes as ‘alleged’ militants. We agreed that the use of the word ‘alleged’ was
redundant in this instance and apologised for the error.
A viewer complained that a broadcast of President Bush’s State of the Union address
was incorrectly labelled “live” when transmitted in Queensland, when it had been
broadcast in New South Wales an hour earlier. We acknowledged this error.
A viewer complained that a 7pm television news item about ongoing security problems
in East Timor only gave unsubstantiated Labor Party claims, and did not contain facts
presented by the Federal Government. We acknowledged that the story was less than
balanced and immediate steps were taken to cover the Foreign Minister’s view on the
issue.
A viewer complained about an interview with a boy whose father had been murdered,
claiming that it was exploitative and beneath the ABC’s standards. We agreed that it
was a mistake to use the interview and apologised for the editorial transgression.
We received four separate complaints about lack of coverage of peace marches on 16
February 2003. Three complaints related to lack of coverage of these marches
generally and one concerned lack of coverage of the Greens’ involvement in the antiwar protest. We acknowledged that ABC Television News had not adequately covered
the peace marches, which was due to footage not arriving in time for broadcast. In one
case, a technical malfunction had prevented a story going to air on ABC radio news.
A viewer complained that the gaffe made on a television news bulletin stating that
"Indonesia claims a war on Iraq would be a war on Islam" during the Prime Minister's
recent visit to Indonesia was inexcusable. We agreed. An apology was aired nationally
the following evening.
An ABC Online user complained about inaccuracies in some online transcripts. We
acknowledged that the standard of some transcripts was less than satisfactory and
corrected the errors that had been highlighted in the complaint.
A viewer complained that a super on Parliamentary Question Time on ABC Television
stated ‘live Canberra’ during a speech by the Prime Minister, yet at the same time ABC
NewsRadio was broadcasting Mr Crean's speech. We explained that technical
problems prevented us from removing the word ‘live’ from the tape broadcast into
Queensland and other states receiving delayed transmission. There was no intention
to deceive the audience and we apologised for any confusion that may have occurred.
An ABC Online user complained that a headline for a news story about legal action
being taken against an Islamic charity in the US was inaccurate. We agreed that the
story’s headline was in conflict with the content of the story and apologised for the
error.
Two ABC Online users complained separately that the headline of a news story about
the killing of two Palestinians by Israeli soldiers did not adequately convey that the
Palestinians had initiated the attack. We acknowledged that the headline was
inappropriate and removed it.
A viewer complained that file footage shown in a Lateline report about the second
missile launched by North Korea, depicted the wrong type of missile. We agreed that
the footage shown was inconsistent with the spoken words. The error was caused by a
breakdown in communication between the Sydney and Tokyo bureaux.
An ABC Online user complained that a news story about the killing of a Hamas security
chief inaccurately reported that guards shot the attackers dead when in fact one died
when his explosive belt detonated. We corrected the story. The error was sourced to
information provided by international wire agencies.
A viewer complained that Palestine was referred to as a nation state in an ABC
Television news bulletin. We acknowledged the error and apologised to the viewer.
An ABC Online user complained that the headline of a story about the new Israeli
Government’s position on Palestinian statehood was inaccurate and in conflict with the
story itself. We acknowledged that the headline could have been better phrased and
adjusted it accordingly.
An ABC Online user complained of factual inaccuracy in a news story about the extent
of European support for the US position on Iraq. We concluded that the story was
accurate, but the headline was not and had confused “Europe” with the “European
Union”. The story was no longer accessible on ABC Online.
An ABC Online user complained that a Lateline report incorrectly referred to Indonesian
Foreign Ministry spokesman Marty Natalegawa as the Foreign Minister, and suggested
that he was commenting on behalf of the Malaysian Government. We acknowledged
these errors, which were made by a transcription service. The report broadcast on
ABC Television was correct.
A listener complained that a radio news item about a planned peace march included a
comment from the Trades Hall urging people to attend. This had effect of promoting a
political event. We agreed that the line about the Trades Hall urging people to attend a
rally was inappropriate. While it is important we report on these events, the ABC
should not be seen to be promoting them.
•
A listener complained that a presenter on 612 ABC Brisbane had demonstrated bias
and deliberately attempted to smear the name of Mr Campbell Newman, a contender for
the Lord Mayoralty of Brisbane, by identifying him in a critical piece on his mother,
former Federal Minister and Senator Jocelyn Newman. We explained that Mr Newman
was identified to provide some local context for the statements, and that the ABC did
not believe that the comment constituted bias against Mr Newman. However, we did
acknowledge that the relationship between Campbell and Jocelyn Newman was not
central to the discussion and accepted the listener’s point about the perceptions the
reference may have engendered.
•
A listener complained about an error made on 702 ABC Sydney in broadcasting the
results of the Toorak Handicap race on 14 October and about the response he had
received from ABC Radio. We acknowledged that in hindsight, a correction should
have been made on air and indicated that should such a mistake occur in future, ABC
Radio would attempt to correct it as soon as possible.
•
A listener complained that a broadcast on ABC NewsRadio had advised listeners of a
website which allowed users to donate pizzas and soft drinks to the Israeli Defence
Forces, and that a link to this site was provided from the ABC NewsRadio webpage.
The listener considered the mention of the website on air and the provision of the link on
the website to be inappropriate. We acknowledged that in hindsight, it was
inappropriate to provide a direct link to the Israeli Defence Forces donation website from
the ABC NewsRadio webpage. The link was removed accordingly. However, we
considered the initial broadcast to be topical and relevant and did not uphold the
listener’s claims of pro-Israeli bias.
•
A listener complained that a broadcast on ABC Western Plains NSW in which a
presenter spoke of his desire to work with “pretty women” on ABC Local Radio was
inappropriate, outdated, self-indulgent and possibly offensive and discriminatory. While
noting the light-hearted nature of the discussion between the two presenters on air at
the time, we agreed that the comments were inappropriate.
•
Two listeners complained separately about an inaccurate statement about singer Josef
Schmidt made on ABC Local Radio’s Summer All Over program. The presenter made a
statement that the Nazis had cut out Joseph Schmidt’s tongue. We acknowledged that
the statement about Josef Schmidt was inaccurate and offensive. The presenter
clarified the comments during the following week’s program.
•
A listener complained that a presenter had used ABC NewsRadio as a platform for his
own personal agenda in discussing a tunnel in Sydney to alleviate traffic snarls. We
acknowledged that the presenter had mentioned a rail system option of his own accord
and without attribution.
A listener complained that a presenter on 702 ABC Sydney allowed a racial comment
from a listener to go unchallenged and unedited. We acknowledged that, in hindsight, it
may have been preferable for the presenter to challenge the caller’s racial description
rather than let the comment pass.
An ABC Online user complained about the rudeness of some members of the
discussion lists for Science-Matters and Click-on and expressed concern about the lack
of moderation of these lists. We explained that Science-Matters and Click-on had been
designed as unmoderated lists, but were regularly monitored by editorial staff.
However, following this complaint, we reviewed this approach and acknowledged that
the lists required monitoring at a higher level. We also decided to act on the user’s
suggestion of having a point of contact for members of the list community with serious
concerns about inappropriate behaviour.
(ii) Matters of taste and standards
An ABC Online user complained that a news report on the death of Maurice Gibb
included a photograph captioned “No longer staying alive”. We agreed that the caption
was completely inappropriate and in very poor taste and we apologised for this serious
error of judgement.
A viewer complained that footage of a man shot dead on a pavement was inappropriately
included in the Business Breakfast program immediately prior to the beginning of
children’s programming. We agreed that the footage should not have been shown and
was unnecessary in the context of the story. We apologised to the viewer for this error.
A listener complained that a radio play broadcast on Triple J Breakfast included
“tasteless depravity” which was beyond the realms of good taste and decency. We
explained that the participants had strayed significantly from the comedy play’s script
despite repeated urging from the presenters to stick to it. We acknowledged that the
segment went awry and acknowledged that the broadcast may have offended some
listeners. We apologised to the listener for any offence caused.
A viewer complained that a film, Mothertime, contained offensive language and showed a
drunken mother with two young children being abused. The viewer felt that the broadcast
of this film at 2pm was not appropriate, as young children could be watching. We
acknowledged that, due to an administrative error, the program was incorrectly labelled
“G” in the ABC’s scheduling system rather than “PG”, which led to the program being
shown in an inappropriate timeslot. We apologised for this error and emphasised that
procedures had been put in place to ensure that the incident was not repeated.
•
A viewer complained that an episode of Play School had exposed young viewers to
inaccurate grammar, incorrectly using the possessive form for plurals. We acknowledged
this error, particularly in light of the program’s educational content, and apologised,
advising the viewer of recent advice issued to all staff by the ABC’s Standing Committee
on Spoken English.
A viewer complained that a promotion for the program Hard Core Candy included the
offensive statement “it's not pornography but it is pretty good”. We acknowledged the
viewer’s concerns and assured the viewer that Fly TV did not endorse or promote
pornography. The promotion was intended to be light-hearted and humorous. While we
were comfortable that the promotion did not breach classification guidelines, after
consideration we had decided to remove the promotion from Saturday Morning Fly.
•
A viewer complained that rage included video clips that were unsuitable for broadcast
during the “G” classification timeslot as they depicted violence, sexual themes, suicide
themes and inappropriate role modelling. Our classifiers reviewed the clips and
concluded that they should both be reclassified “PG”. We expressed our regret that the
videos had been broadcast during “G” programming and assured the viewer that the
videos would no longer be shown during the “G” timeslot.
(iii) Other
An ABC Online user complained that many of the links on the News Online site had been
faulty recently. We explained that we were in the process of converting to a new content
management system which would offer vastly improved performance and provide new
functionality. Unfortunately, this changeover had caused some presentation problems.
We apologised for the inconvenience to users.
A listener complained that the ABC had not responded to their submission to the
Regional Radio Production Fund. We acknowledged that a timely response had not
been provided and explained that this was due to the large number of submissions
received.
A listener complained that their STD call to talkback had been put on hold for an
extended period. The listener also complained that the ABC sought to “freeze out”
talkback callers from some areas. We acknowledged that the way the listener’s
telephone call was dealt with was unacceptable and advised that procedures had been
put in place to ensure that it did not recur. The listener’s complaint that callers were
“frozen out” was not upheld, and we explained that the production team was unable to tell
which area calls were coming from.
A number of listeners complained that the background music played during an Encounter
program on “Iraqis in Australia” was too loud and detracted from the interview. We
explained that this was due to a technical problem and provided the listener with a
transcript of the program.
A listener complained that an ABC staff member had used a dismissive tone in their
written response to a complaint about use of mobile phones in radio talkback. We
explained that the response had been provided in good faith, but acknowledged that the
choice of some words used in the letter were inappropriate. We apologised for any
offence caused.
A viewer complained about the lack of captions on ABC news bulletins during the
Canberra bushfires. We apologised for the lack of closed captions on the 7.00pm ACT
news bulletin on 18 January 2003 and explained that this was due to a series of technical
difficulties and local power outages.
Two viewers complained separately that the last few moments of President Bush’s State
of the Union address were cut short. We apologised that viewers were unable to watch
the complete program and explained that this was due to isolated technical problems
which resulted in the transmission ending prior to completion of the program.
4.
Summary of investigations completed by the Complaints Review
Executive
During the period 1 January to 31 March 2003, the CRE finalised reviews into thirteen
matters. In one case, the complaint was upheld.
A summary of each review is provided below.
1. ABC Radio News – Global warming
Background
The complaint related to two radio news stories about global warming. One story reported
claims from the Queensland Conservation Council that there was danger of an increase in
disease as a result of global warming and the second story reported rare snow in parts of
Gippsland. The listener was concerned that the reports were unbalanced and lacked
scientific rigour.
Finding
The CRE considered that the listener’s concerns were largely focused on the first story. The
CRE determined that there was no evidence that the ABC report was advocating a point of
view on global warming. The report outlined the findings of a study by the Queensland
Conservation Council. The CRE noted that the complainant objected to the scientific
assumptions of global warming but this did not affect the ABC’s duty to report what significant
groups in the community say in relation to this issue.
The complaint was not upheld.
2. AM – Deaths of children in the Middle East
Background
The complaint alleged continuing bias in the reporting of events in Israel and pointed to the
edition of AM broadcast on 26 November 2002. The complainant asserted that there was a
difference in reporting of the deaths of Israeli and Palestinian children and that no attempt
was made to ‘put any humanity’ on the Israeli victims.
Finding
The CRE identified the principal complaint as being that the ABC selectively and differentially
reports the deaths of Israeli and Palestinian children.
The CRE surveyed reports from the latter half of 2002 on AM, The World Today and PM
concerning children and the Middle East and could find no trend of reporting that would
support the proposition that the ABC had reported the deaths of Israeli children differently
from the deaths of Palestinian children.
The CRE concluded that the proposition that the ABC had been discriminatory in its reporting
of the plight of children in the Middle East could not be supported.
The complaint was not upheld.
3. AM – Middle East reporting
Background
The complaint concerned a story on AM on 21 September 2002 about the Israeli siege on
Yasser Arafat's Ramallah headquarters. The report included statements that the Israeli
Government did not wish to take Mr Arafat into custody, they simply wanted to teach him a
lesson. The complainants disputed whether the phrase “teach him a lesson” was used by the
Israeli Government. The complainants had contacted the Israeli Government spokesman and
reported that he had denied using these words.
Finding
The CRE observed that the fact that the phrase was part of the Israeli Government’s strategy
towards Mr Arafat appeared not in doubt.
The Israeli Government spokesman visited the ABC’s Jerusalem office on 20 September
2002 as part of briefings to international news bureaux. The ABC’s reporter confirmed that
the spokesman used the phrase “teach Arafat a lesson” during that briefing. The
complainants assert that the spokesman had denied this.
The CRE reported that he was not in a position to come to a concluded view other than
observing that there was not agreement about what was actually said by the Israeli
Government spokesman in the ABC Jersualem bureau.
This complaint was unable to be determined.
4. Various – Bias
Background
The complaint touched on four separate issues:
The Insiders program’s use of an animated cartoon counting down the days to the
Prime Minister’s birthday. The complainant observed that the use of the cartoon
character was ‘an exercise in cynical, biased, cowardice’ and was irresponsible
speculation.
Reports on Lateline and PM concerning upgrades in Telstra infrastructure and the
company’s share price. Both programs had used the description ‘scandal’ which the
complainant believed demonstrated a lapse in professional standards.
Multiple repeated references to President Bush as ‘President Shrub’ on Radio
National’s Late Night Live program. The complainant suggested that this was ‘self
indulgent filth’.
A reference in news bulletins to the Prime Minister’s ‘first visit’ to the location of the
NSW bushfires, which the complainant suggested was ‘a barely concealed denigratory
attack on the Prime Minister’.
Findings
The CRE determined that the cartoon, which commented on the future of the Prime
Minister, related to an issue of importance for Australia and Australians. The cartoon
complied with the ABC’s Editorial Policies which require editorial staff to be enterprising
in perceiving, pursuing and presenting issues.
The CRE determined that as the Howard Government had ordered a new inquiry into
claims that Telstra had misled Federal Parliament, it was not unreasonable, in this
context, for the presenters of Lateline and PM to refer to these allegations against
Telstra and to the suggestion of scandal.
The CRE emphasised that Late Night Live was a program of review and analysis, and
not a news or current affairs program. While the presenter’s reference to President
Bush as ‘President Shrub’ was provocative, it did reflect the opinionated and
sometimes satirical style and brief of the program. This reference did not constitute a
breach of ABC Editorial Policies.
The CRE determined that the Prime Minister’s first visit to the fires was a relevant
available fact and that its inclusion in an ABC broadcast did not amount to partisan
reporting.
The complaints were not upheld.
5. AM – Terrorists vs militants
Background
The complaint centred on the use of the term “militants” instead of “terrorists”, particularly in
relation to coverage of the explosion at Mombasa’s Paradise Hotel in Kenya. The
complainant considered that the word “militant” gave some legitimacy to these actions and
also missed the prime anti-human aims of the terrorists.
Finding
The CRE found no evidence that the ABC’s use of the term “militant” minimised the trauma
and tragedy associated with this violence.
The complaint was not upheld.
6. Triple J – Satire
Background
The complaint arose from a satirical item broadcast on Triple J relating to dance clubs and
evangelistic work undertaken by some Christian churches. The complainant asserted that the
report mocked the Christian faith and included deliberately hurtful comments which were in
breach of the ABC’s Code of Practice.
Finding
The CRE noted that it was clear that the piece was satirical in intention. The linkages between
the artefacts of the dance club and aspects of the life of Jesus and the broader JudeoChristian tradition were very much exaggerated.
The complaint was not upheld.
7. Hindsight – Lack of balance
Background
The complaint was prompted by a Hindsight program which explored the experiences of
those involved in the Eureka Youth Movement in the 1940s and 1950s. Essentially, the
complainant asserted that the ABC’s output lacked balance and only focused on coverage of
issues on the “left” side of politics.
Finding
The CRE observed that the Corporation had committed very significant program resources to
analysing and exploring the experiences of conservative politics, listing many relevant
examples.
The CRE could not support the suggestion that the ABC had ignored ‘right of centre’ parties
or more conservative political interests.
The complaint was not upheld.
8. Australia All Over – Comments about Indonesia
Background
The complaint related to comments made by the presenter of Australia All Over when
recounting an acquaintance’s experience on a Jakarta street. According to the acquaintance,
cars were being stopped and occupants asked ‘Excuse me, we are collecting money to kill
Christians in Ambon…can you donate?’. The complainant asserted that the presenter’s
subsequent comments sought to extrapolate this incident to Indonesians and Indonesian
culture generally and were ‘unthinking, insensitive and racist’.
Finding
The CRE noted that there was no difficulty in the presenter recounting the anecdote from the
streets of Jakarta, although it should have been sourced more accurately. However, the
conclusions the presenter drew from the experience he recounted were, at best, a loose and
careless generalisation.
The CRE determined that the ABC’s Code of Practice had been breached in relation to
section 2.4 regarding the avoidance of language or images that were likely to disparage or
discriminate against any section of the community on account of nationality or religious or
cultural belief.
The complaint was upheld.
9. ABC Radio News – Coverage of Sydney bushfires
Complaint
The complainant asserted that ABC Classic FM listeners in New South Wales were being
provided with a “second rate news service”. The complaint stemmed from what the
complainant considered to be inadequate coverage of the Sydney bushfires in news bulletins
on this network.
Findings
The CRE determined that the complainant’s assertions about the coverage provided by ABC
Classic FM were incorrect – the bushfires had been covered in all bulletins provided by the
network on the relevant day.
The complaint was not upheld.
10. ABC NewsRadio – Pizzas for soldiers
Background
The complaint related to an item broadcast on ABC NewsRadio about a website that had
been established in Israel to allow citizens to send pizzas and soft drink to soldiers guarding
their cities. A link to the website was provided from the ABC NewsRadio site.
The complainant was of the view that it was inappropriate for the ABC to link to this website.
This aspect of the complaint was upheld at the initial stage of review and the link was
removed. However, the listener considered that the ABC’s response to the complaint was
inadequate as the ABC continued to defend the initial broadcast as a matter of public interest.
This aspect of the complaint was referred to the CRE for review.
Finding
The CRE agreed with the initial decision that providing a link to the website had been
inappropriate.
In terms of the story itself, the CRE concluded that the radio broadcast did not breach the
ABC’s Editorial Policies. The presenter had made it clear that he was not advocating the
interests of the Israeli side of the Middle East conflict but was observing ‘one of the unusual
web ideas’.
The complaint was not upheld.
11. AM – Republican “Southern Strategy”
Background
The complaint arose from a report broadcast on 17 December 2002 relating to comments by
US Senate Leader Trent Lott about racial segregation. The complainant asserted that the
suggestion ‘that Nixon won the 1968 presidential election by appealing to subtle racism in the
South’ was ‘historically disputable and arguably inaccurate’.
Finding
The CRE noted that the story was about potential division in the Republican Party as a result
of the comments of the Senate Leader. The comment about Richard Nixon was a matter of
context and was supported by authoritative commentary, such as The Columbia University
Press Columbia Encyclopaedia (Sixth Edition 2001).
While acknowledging that history was subject to interpretative debate, the CRE was unable to
uphold the complaint that the AM reporter provided an ‘incorrect perspective’ and that the
ABC was providing propaganda rather than news.
This complaint was not upheld.
12. ABC NewsRadio – News vs publicity
Background
The complaint related to items broadcast on ABC NewsRadio in relation to protest
demonstrations. The complainant asserted that these could only be described as publicity for
forthcoming protests, and were not news at all.
The complainant also questioned the amount of air time devoted to ‘causes espoused by civil
libertarian and refugee rights advocacy groups’.
Finding
The CRE noted the relevant requirements of the ABC Editorial Policies and concluded that
the items broadcast on ABC NewsRadio complied with these policies. There was no
suggestion that listeners should attend or support the cause or demonstration. Reporting the
views of a peace or refugee interest group did not mean that the ABC was endorsing a
particular perspective on a current national debate. However, it was appropriate for ABC
NewsRadio to report on the various contributors to that debate.
In the context of reporting the law and order debate, the CRE found no evidence of the ABC
being an advocate for or ‘continually deferring’ to the Council for Civil Liberties.
The complaint was not upheld.
13. ABC News Online – Link to external website
Background
The complaint related to an online news story which reported that Brisbane Lord Mayor, Mr
Jim Soorley, was inviting people to express their views on a possible war on Iraq by visiting
his anti-war website and emailing their feedback to Prime Minister John Howard.
The complainant considered that it was inappropriate for ABC News to provide a link to a
website that included ‘rabid anti-Bush, anti-Howard’ sentiment.
Finding
The CRE noted that it was clear from the report that the existence of the website was the
essence of the story. The CRE concluded that it was appropriate, therefore, for the location of
the site to be identified and linked as part of the story. There was no advocacy or
commendation of Mayor Soorley’s perspective on the prospect of war and the nature of any
Australian commitment.
The complaint was not upheld.