{"id":15130,"date":"2014-02-27T06:00:47","date_gmt":"2014-02-26T19:00:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/?p=15130"},"modified":"2019-04-13T23:58:16","modified_gmt":"2019-04-13T13:58:16","slug":"press-council-upholds-margokingston1-complaint-dailytelegraph-ashbygate","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/press-council-upholds-margokingston1-complaint-dailytelegraph-ashbygate\/","title":{"rendered":"Press Council upholds @margokingston1 complaint against @dailytelegraph on #Ashby"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span class=\"embed-youtube\" style=\"text-align:center; display: block;\"><iframe loading=\"lazy\" class=\"youtube-player\" width=\"640\" height=\"360\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/rD1lpAiDXfw?version=3&#038;rel=1&#038;showsearch=0&#038;showinfo=1&#038;iv_load_policy=1&#038;fs=1&#038;hl=en-US&#038;autohide=2&#038;wmode=transparent\" allowfullscreen=\"true\" style=\"border:0;\" sandbox=\"allow-scripts allow-same-origin allow-popups allow-presentation\"><\/iframe><\/span><\/p>\n<p>By <a title=\"Margo Kingston\" href=\"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/margo-kingston\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Margo Kingston<\/a> \u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/twitter.com\/margokingston1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">@margokingston1<\/a><\/p>\n<p>27 February 2014<\/p>\n<p>Soon after I took to Twitter in late 2012 I was horrified by the decision of the <em>Daily Telegraph<\/em> to bury its report of the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au\/judgments\/Judgments\/fca\/single\/2012\/2012fca1411\">December 12 Rares judgement<\/a>\u00a0dismissing James Ashby&#8217;s sexual harassment action against Peter Slipper as an abuse of Court process. The paper screamed headlines when it broke the lodgement\u00a0of Ashby&#8217;s claim and pursued the case very,\u00a0very hard (see <a href=\"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/2013\/01\/19\/the-daily-telegraph-coverage-of-the-slipper-scandal\/\">The Daily Telegraph coverage of the Slipper scandal<\/a>). I therefore made a complaint to the Press Council against that newspaper on December 22 and began a fascinating journey.<\/p>\n<p>On June 12 last year I flew to Sydney at my own expense for the hearing of my complaint with a representative of the <em>Daily Telegraph<\/em>. The Press Council\u00a0chief Julian Disney chaired a panel of community representatives. The meeting was permanently confidential, as was all documentation, until the final adjudication.<\/p>\n<p>I was then advised that\u00a0the adjudication panel had referred \u00a0the matter to\u00a0the full\u00a0Council\u00a0meeting on August 29 for decision, rather than decide the matter \u00a0itself. This happens at the request of the chair or other panel members, usually because it is particularly important or might provide guidance on how the\u00a0Council\u00a0applied its principles. The media representative concerned, in this case Campbell Reid of News Corp, would not get the papers or be present when the matter was\u00a0<span style=\"line-height: 1.5em;\">discussed. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"line-height: 1.5em;\">The newspaper sought a review of the ensuing draft adjudication (also permanently confidential) and more documents were exchanged. I received the final adjudication on Monday this week, on a confidential basis until 6am today, when it was due for mandatory publication in the <em>Daily Telegraph<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Here is the adjudication, followed by the documentation I am allowed to publish, since I thought readers and media practitioners, academics and journalism students may be interested in the process. The <em>No Fibs<\/em> archive of our pursuit of accountability in the Ashby saga is <a href=\"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/?s=ashby\">here<\/a>.<\/p>\n<div class='dropshadowboxes-container ' style='width:650px;'>\r\n                            <div class='dropshadowboxes-drop-shadow dropshadowboxes-rounded-corners dropshadowboxes-inside-and-outside-shadow dropshadowboxes-lifted-both dropshadowboxes-effect-default' style=' border: 1px solid #dddddd; height:; background-color:#ffffff;    '>\r\n                             <strong>Press Council Adjudication 1573<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Margo Kingston\/The Daily Telegraph<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The following adjudication has been issued by the Australian Press Council.<\/p>\n<p>The Press Council has considered a complaint about an article in The Daily Telegraph on 13\u00a0December 2012, headed \u201cCourt rejects Slipper case\u201d. The article reported a Federal Court decision on the previous day to dismiss as an abuse of process a legal action for sexual harassment brought\u00a0against Peter Slipper MP by James Ashby. It appeared on page 17 of the newspaper and on the publication\u2019s website.<\/p>\n<p>Margo Kingston complained that the report of the dismissal on page 17 did not give it sufficient\u00a0prominence in light of the newspaper\u2019s very prominent and detailed coverage earlier in the year of Mr Ashby\u2019s commencement of the legal proceedings and his allegations against Mr Slipper. The\u00a0\u201cexclusive\u201d report on 21 April 2012 about commencement of the proceedings and Mr Ashby\u2019s allegations had occupied all news space on pages 1 and 2 and most of page 3. On the next day, Mr\u00a0Slipper had stood aside as Speaker.<\/p>\n<p>The Daily Telegraph said page 17 was a prominent page and the top half had comprised the report on\u00a0the dismissal, a photograph of Mr Ashby and an article on another aspect of the proceedings. It had\u00a0also published reports about the matter on its website on the previous afternoon and in the next few\u00a0days had published related reports online and opinion pieces in print. The story also was covered\u00a0widely in other media outlets.<\/p>\n<p>The newspaper said placement on page 17 was partly because of an unusually high number of other\u00a0important articles on that day. The greater length and prominence of the coverage in April was due to\u00a0the topic having much greater political significance as Mr Slipper was then the Speaker and his\u00a0acceptance of that position had crucially influenced the balance of votes in the House of Representatives. It was also partly because the April story was an \u201cexclusive\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>The Council agrees that the political significance and \u201cnewsworthiness\u201d of an event are obviously\u00a0relevant to the length and prominence with which it is reported. By the time of the dismissal of the proceedings, the political situation had changed considerably, especially because Mr Slipper had\u00a0stood aside and then, in October, resigned as Speaker. Also, several unrelated news stories (especially the funeral of a police officer) clearly merited prominent coverage in the issue of 13\u00a0December.<\/p>\n<p>The Council\u2019s relevant Principle states: \u201cPublications should take reasonable steps to ensure reports\u00a0are accurate, fair and balanced\u201d. The Principle does not necessarily require complete, or almost complete, fairness or balance. But a combination of factors meant that avoiding serious unfairness or\u00a0imbalance was of special importance in this particular case.<\/p>\n<p>First, the commencement of legal proceedings was a story the newspaper had \u201cbroken\u201d in April,\u00a0describing the allegations as \u201camongst the most serious ever raised\u201d in Australian political history and \u201cpotentially deadly\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Second, the allegations, and progress of the proceedings, were reported prominently on many\u00a0occasions in ensuing months, often in the first few pages of The Daily Telegraph.<\/p>\n<p>Third, dismissal of the proceedings raised important questions about Mr Slipper\u2019s decision to stand\u00a0aside as Speaker, which in the words of the newspaper happened \u201cafter The Daily Telegraph revealed allegations of sexual harassment and Cabcharge misuse &#8211; [which] means the government\u00a0loses a precious vote in parliament\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Fourth, readers of a daily newspaper of this kind can reasonably expect to be informed by it of such a\u00a0key development as the dismissal of these proceedings as an abuse of process for political reasons,\u00a0especially when it had previously given the matter great prominence. In the circumstances of this case, it is not reasonable to assume that readers who saw the very\u00a0prominent coverage across pages 1-3 of the 21 April edition were likely to see the very much less prominent report of the dismissal on page 17 of an edition eight months later or see the report on its\u00a0website. It also is not reasonable to regard the newspaper\u2019s obligations of fairness and balance as having been met by the story being widely covered in other media outlets.<\/p>\n<p>The Council upholds the complaint due to the very stark difference between the detail, tone and\u00a0prominence of the newspaper\u2019s initial coverage on 21 April and of its report on 13 December of the dismissal. The later report did not need to match the prominence and detail of the earlier report by, for\u00a0example, being of similar length and on the same pages. But in the circumstances of this case the\u00a0degree of difference was so great as to constitute a clear breach of the Council\u2019s Principle concerning\u00a0fairness and balance.<\/p>\n<p>It is not the Council\u2019s role to say precisely how this unfairness or imbalance should have been\u00a0avoided. There were clearly a number of possibilities between which the publication could choose.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Additional note (not required for publication by the newspaper):<br \/>\n<\/strong>The newspaper said that the prospect of an appeal by Mr Ashby influenced its decision not to give the issue\u00a0more extensive treatment. The Council notes, however, that it is common and accepted practice to report court\u00a0decisions, sometimes in great detail, even though they may be subject to an appeal.\u00a0The newspaper also quoted from an Advisory Guideline of the Council on bias. The words which it quoted relate\u00a0to bias and fairness in publishing different political opinions, but this adjudication relates to fairness and balance\u00a0in the reporting of facts.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Relevant Council Principles (not required for publication by the newspaper):<\/strong><br \/>\nThis adjudication applies part of General Principle 1: \u201cPublications should take reasonable steps to ensure\u00a0reports are accurate, fair and balanced.\u201d \r\n                            <\/div>\r\n                        <\/div>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>1. Margo&#8217;s complaint to\u00a0Press\u00a0Council<\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" style=\"width: 100%; height: 500px;\" src=\"http:\/\/docs.google.com\/gview?url=http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/press-council-complaint.pdf&amp;embedded=true\" width=\"320\" height=\"240\" frameborder=\"0\"><\/iframe><a href=\"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/2014\/02\/27\/press-council-upholds-margokingston1-complaint-dailytelegraph-ashbygate\/press-council-complaint\/\" rel=\"attachment wp-att-15132\"><br \/>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<p>2.\u00a0Press\u00a0Council\u00a0Statement of Issues, with Daily Telegraph response, my reply and their rejoinder<\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" style=\"width: 100%; height: 500px;\" src=\"http:\/\/docs.google.com\/gview?url=http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/Summary-of-Issues-including-publications-further-comments-1.pdf&amp;embedded=true\" width=\"320\" height=\"240\" frameborder=\"0\"><\/iframe><a href=\"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/2014\/02\/27\/press-council-upholds-margokingston1-complaint-dailytelegraph-ashbygate\/summary-of-issues-including-publications-further-comments-1\/\" rel=\"attachment wp-att-15135\"><br \/>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<p>3.\u00a0Press\u00a0Council\u00a0adjudication panel fact sheet<\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" style=\"width: 100%; height: 500px;\" src=\"http:\/\/docs.google.com\/gview?url=http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/Fact-Sheet-Adjudications-Panel-1.pdf&amp;embedded=true\" width=\"320\" height=\"240\" frameborder=\"0\"><\/iframe><a href=\"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/2014\/02\/27\/press-council-upholds-margokingston1-complaint-dailytelegraph-ashbygate\/fact-sheet-adjudications-panel-1\/\" rel=\"attachment wp-att-15137\"><br \/>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<p>4. The Daily Telegraph request for review of provisional adjudication<\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" style=\"width: 100%; height: 500px;\" src=\"http:\/\/docs.google.com\/gview?url=http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/Request-for-Review-Daily-Telegraph.pdf&amp;embedded=true\" width=\"320\" height=\"240\" frameborder=\"0\"><\/iframe><a href=\"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/2014\/02\/27\/press-council-upholds-margokingston1-complaint-dailytelegraph-ashbygate\/request-for-review-daily-telegraph\/\" rel=\"attachment wp-att-15138\"><br \/>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<p>5. Margo&#8217;s response to Daily Telegraph request for review<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/2014\/02\/27\/press-council-upholds-margokingston1-complaint-dailytelegraph-ashbygate\/response-to-dt-review-request\/\" rel=\"attachment wp-att-15139\"><iframe loading=\"lazy\" style=\"width: 100%; height: 500px;\" src=\"http:\/\/docs.google.com\/gview?url=http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/Response-to-DT-review-request_Redacted.pdf&amp;embedded=true\" width=\"320\" height=\"240\" frameborder=\"0\"><\/iframe><br \/>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<p>6.\u00a0The final Press Council adjudication<\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" style=\"width: 100%; height: 500px;\" src=\"http:\/\/docs.google.com\/gview?url=http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/Final-Adjudication-1573-Kingston-Daily-Telegraph.pdf&amp;embedded=true\" width=\"320\" height=\"240\" frameborder=\"0\"><\/iframe><a href=\"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/2014\/02\/27\/press-council-upholds-margokingston1-complaint-dailytelegraph-ashbygate\/final-adjudication-1573-kingston-daily-telegraph\/\" rel=\"attachment wp-att-15140\"><br \/>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong>Daily Telegraph reaction:<\/strong><\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"twitter-tweet\" width=\"500\">\n<p>Correction: <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/dailytelegraph\">@dailytelegraph<\/a> has p 3 pointer to Press Council ruling on <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/hashtag\/Ashby?src=hash\">#Ashby<\/a> full text p 29 <a href=\"http:\/\/t.co\/soS9o33tDT\">pic.twitter.com\/soS9o33tDT<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&mdash; Margo Kingston (@margokingston1) <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/margokingston1\/status\/438814712021516291\">February 26, 2014<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><script async src=\"\/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js\" charset=\"utf-8\"><\/script><\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"twitter-tweet\" width=\"500\">\n<p>Press Council ruling is on p 29 of <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/dailytelegraph\">@dailytelegraph<\/a>, its trashing is the entire editorial with pic of me &#8211; online? <a href=\"http:\/\/t.co\/hROqqyy4EC\">pic.twitter.com\/hROqqyy4EC<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&mdash; Margo Kingston (@margokingston1) <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/margokingston1\/status\/438798105241071617\">February 26, 2014<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><script async src=\"\/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js\" charset=\"utf-8\"><\/script><\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"twitter-tweet\" width=\"500\">\n<p>.<a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/dailytelegraph\">@dailytelegraph<\/a> suggests my political views should debar Press Council from hearing my complaint &#8211; DT freedom rules. <a href=\"http:\/\/t.co\/85K0zwyLki\">pic.twitter.com\/85K0zwyLki<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&mdash; Margo Kingston (@margokingston1) <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/margokingston1\/status\/438819200597901313\">February 26, 2014<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><script async src=\"\/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js\" charset=\"utf-8\"><\/script><\/p>\n<p><strong>ABC Mediawatch<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.abc.net.au\/mediawatch\/transcripts\/s3956001.htm#\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">The Tele slips on Slipper<\/a><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"embed-youtube\" style=\"text-align:center; display: block;\"><iframe loading=\"lazy\" class=\"youtube-player\" width=\"640\" height=\"360\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/w4M1o0s3XZM?version=3&#038;rel=1&#038;showsearch=0&#038;showinfo=1&#038;iv_load_policy=1&#038;fs=1&#038;hl=en-US&#038;autohide=2&#038;wmode=transparent\" allowfullscreen=\"true\" style=\"border:0;\" sandbox=\"allow-scripts allow-same-origin allow-popups allow-presentation\"><\/iframe><\/span><\/p>\n<p><strong>The Conversation<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/theconversation.com\/is-press-freedom-a-licence-for-unfair-and-unbalanced-coverage-23830\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Is press freedom a licence for unfair and unbalanced coverage?<\/a><\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" src=\"\/\/storify.com\/geeksrulz\/the-day-after-8-months\/embed\" width=\"100%\" height=\"750\" frameborder=\"no\"><\/iframe><\/p>\n<!-- AddThis Advanced Settings generic via filter on the_content --><!-- AddThis Share Buttons generic via filter on the_content -->","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>By Margo Kingston \u00a0@margokingston1 27 February 2014 Soon after I took to Twitter in late 2012 I was horrified by the decision of the Daily Telegraph to bury its report of the December 12 Rares judgement\u00a0dismissing James Ashby&#8217;s sexual harassment action against Peter Slipper as an abuse of Court process. The paper screamed headlines when [&hellip;]<!-- AddThis Advanced Settings generic via filter on get_the_excerpt --><!-- AddThis Share Buttons generic via filter on get_the_excerpt --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":15144,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false}}},"categories":[3434,3402,59,585,26,1637],"tags":[109,113,175,185,275,2565,1381,379,380,434,466],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/8W1ec.jpg?fit=800%2C400&ssl=1","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p3t0mw-3W2","jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15130"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15130"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15130\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/15144"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15130"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15130"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15130"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}