Jim Eagles: McCully doesn't let facts get in the way of a good lecture

COMMENT

It is regrettable that a senior politician such as Murray McCully should choose to wrap an ill-informed attack on the Press Council into criticisms of the media in general. (Murray McCully: Print editors guilty of self-interest and lack of principle)

There is, of course, nothing exceptionable or unusual in an Opposition MP expressing dissatisfaction with the media coverage his party receives. Jousting between politicians and journalists is a normal and healthy part of the democratic process.

But in his speech to the National Press Club on July 20 Mr McCully goes well beyond complaining about bias in the media and criticises the media regulatory bodies for being part of his perceived problem.

That is unfortunate on two counts.

First, because there is a risk that such comments may undermine public confidence in the self-regulatory approach the print media have adopted in this country and, as Mr McCully alludes in his speech, may lead to forms of regulation that are less independent and more vulnerable to political interference.

Second, because, at least as far as the Press Council is concerned, his comments to the Press Club seem to be based on a series of misconceptions.

To set the record straight it may be useful to contrast what Mr McCully says about the council in his speech with the facts:

* "The Press Council ... has long been discarded as a serious regulator of professional standards by practitioners like myself."

A search of the database of Press Council decisions identifies only one complaint by Mr McCully, dating back to 1999.

That complaint was made by him in his capacity as Minister of Tourism and, for reasons set out in a detailed decision of 1700 words, was not upheld.

It may well be that Mr McCully has been involved in other complaints but, on the face of it, he does not seem to have given the council much of a trial before giving up.

* "For a start, most complainants are statistically likely to be dead before their complaint is dealt with."

Most Press Council complaints are dealt with within three months, not exactly a lifetime, even in politics.

Most of that time is taken up giving complainant and respondent adequate time to formulate responses to each other's submissions.

Mr McCully's unsuccessful complaint related to articles that appeared in March and the decision was issued in August. That is longer than usual, but still remarkably swift by most judicial standards.

* "If they do live to see the process through, they will find that they are dealing with a body with few clear rules, other than the ones they make up along the way ... "

The Press Council has, for several years, had a code of principles, drawn up following extensive consultation, and based mainly on international best practice for media complaints organisations.

Those principles are frequently quoted in complaints and form the framework within which council decisions are made.

* " ... and one which is dominated by representatives of a very small club which is the handful of media chains in this country".

The council has 11 members, of whom six - including the chairman, who is always a retired High Court judge - are members of the public chosen by a panel chaired by the Chief Ombudsman.

Of the five industry members, only two of the present council actually work for the country's two media chains, Fairfax and APN.

* Mr McCully also refers in his speech to a complaint, which he did not send to the Press Council, noting that the Fairfax executive he had been dealing with "was a member of the Press Council".

Industry members of the Press Council do not sit on complaints involving their own newspapers.

In the conclusion to his speech, Mr McCully notes that "having explored most of the avenues for redress in relation to media misdemeanours, I must pronounce them all to some degree to be failures".

"So, when faced with partisanship, inaccuracy or mischief-making, I have devised my own solution: I scream like a stuck pig.

"And while it would be misleading you to suggest that this approach has been more successful than any of the other avenues, I can advise that it is definitely very much more satisfying."

If what Mr McCully is after is mere self-gratification, then occasional outbursts of porcine squealing might, indeed, be the best course for him to take.

But if what he wants is to see an effective mechanism for dealing with those cases where, as he puts it, "an editor or reporter does allow their prejudices to override their professionalism", he might be better off taking a more considered look at the Press Council.

Its structure has been designed to create a body that is knowledgeable about the media but entirely independent and where, if it should come to a crunch - and in my experience it never has - members of the public can outvote the members of the media.

It allows ordinary people to take a complaint about a newspaper at no cost to themselves beyond a couple of postage stamps.

And, as I can testify from personal experience, it carries great weight with journalists who absolutely hate having a complaint against them upheld.

* Jim Eagles has been editor of the National Business Review, the Bay of Plenty Times, Hawke's Bay Today and the Business Herald and is now travel editor of the Herald. He has been a member of the Press Council for seven years. He is responding to National MP Murray McCully, who questioned the Press Council's effectiveness in upholding print-media standards.