The Press Council's ruling on that infamous kangaroo piece. And other media tidbits of the day.
Press Council rules on eating roos.
In January, The Australian'
s food writer John Lethlean wrote a feature on shooting and eating kangaroos. A month later, the Australian Society for Kangaroos complained about the article to the Australian Press Council. The case has since then become emblematic of News Corp's complaints about the press standards body.
In early August, as the Oz
waited for the adjudication to come down, legal affairs editor Chris Merritt said
the complaint "raises the question of whether the complaint-handling processes of the Press Council are too easily captured by activists seeking to punish journalists who express opinions with which they disagree":
"In the hands of Julian Disney’s Press Council, 'the kangaroo case' has become the stuff of legend. It has become a marathon of complaint notifications, summaries of the principal issues, debates about the relevant standards of practice, multiple responses and a formal hearing.
"This one case has consumed so much management and editorial time at this newspaper that the file, if printed, would run to 100 pages. But the end is near. A provisional adjudication has been produced and the next step will be a final adjudication."
For those playing along at home, the case has indeed finally been decided. The Oz
carried the Press Council adjudication in its weekend edition, which revealed the body had thrown out complaints about whether Lethlean was correct in describing the kangaroo harvesting method as "world's best practice". However, the Press Council did rule that the publication should have been more open about who paid for the trip. The article carried a disclosure that the trip was paid for by Liquid Ideas. However, it didn't explain that Liquid Ideas was the promotional company for kangaroo producer Macro Meats, who had proposed and paid for the trip. According to the adjudication
"[T]he involvement of Macro Meats in proposing and sponsoring the trip amounted to a potential conflict of interest and should have been disclosed explicitly to readers. Accordingly, that aspect of the complaint is upheld. The publication’s subsequent disclosure in the online archived version of the article is welcome but does not eliminate the breach."
The adjudication doesn't by any means mark the end of the Oz'
s campaign. Veteran media columnist Mark Day writes
in this morning's edition that the council has been taken over "by a legal and bureaucratic elite in thrall of social justice ideals". Too many of those deciding on adjudications come from backgrounds "trained to pick apart the entrails of the law, especially in the fields of privacy, social justice and the protection of minorities," and are not representative of "ordinary people". Disney is soon to step down from the council, and Day hopes his replacement views the media's job as "to tell it like it is, not as some would wish it to be". -- Myriam Robin
Who wore it better?
Tanya Plibersek and Stephen Conroy have missed two crucial public inquiry hearings into the government's new laws to boost ASIO powers, reported The Daily Telegraph
This came after the Labor frontbenchers reportedly requested to be appointed to the committee, leading to this photoshop job...
It's a well-rehearsed trope for the Tele
, which last photoshopped Labor ministers into the film in February
. We're glad to see Conroy ditched the teeth in his latest outing. -- Myriam Robin