Press watchdog warns editors not to be tardy

The New Zealand Press Council's chairman has taken some newspaper and magazine editors to task for tardiness and truculence in responding to complaints.

"Fortunately the practices are not widespread but there have been concerns relating to these matters," retired High Court judge Barry Paterson says in the council's annual report.

The print media watchdog considered 43 complaints last year, upholding 11 and partly upholding two.

Mr Paterson said there continued to be occasions when editors did not respond to complaints directed to them and some occasions when editors were very tardy in responding to a formal complaint once it was sent to them from the Press Council.

"There have been other occasions, fortunately in only a very small proportion of cases, where the editor has been truculent in its response to the Press Council," he says.

"In the great majority of complaints the council accepts that the complainant is sincere and believes he or she has a reasonable complaint. That complainant is hardly likely to have his or her assessment of the press enhanced by a belittling reply, or a satirical reply which does not appear to take the complaint seriously."

Mr Paterson said some editors attempted to "defend the indefensible", sometimes with the altruistic motivation of protecting a journalist. But accepting errors or misjudgments may serve the press better than "defensive stonewalling" and may also prevent a complaint to the Press Council.

While there was the usual number of complaints last year about accuracy, fairness and balance, there was an increase in complaints about headlines, subheadings and captions.

A newspaper may draw on the most newsworthy aspect for headlines, but the council would uphold complaints if headlines did not accurately and fairly convey the substance of reports.

Commenting on industry changes, the annual report said audiences and newspapers had migrated to the electronic media. But because cash had declined, the demands of serving website updates, blogging and multi-media reporting had not always been met with correspondingly increased staffing.

Newspapers had recruited new staff specifically for an online audience but that recruiting had usually been at junior level and the immediacy was not encouraging for investigative reporting.

"Journalists are notorious complainers but it is reasonable to question if print reporters being required to produce reports across a wide range of outlets across an ever-increasing time frame is conducive to good in-depth reporting."

- NZPA