Empowered shock jocks must also be accountable

10 March 2014

There is currently debate over whether free speech is a more important human right than freedom from racial discrimination. This follows the Federal Government's election promise to eliminate the 'hurt feelings' test from the vilification grounds of Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. The pledge before the election was prompted by a court finding that journalist Andrew Bolt broke the law when he caused offence with his questioning of the ethnicity of particular fair-skinned Aboriginal persons.

Aside from discussion of the fate of Section 18C, there is no question that news media are becoming more powerful as players in our democracy and that they will continue to act as staunch free speech advocates. That is not surprising because free speech principles enshrined in law give investigative reporters and shock jocks alike the legislative freedom they need to do their job.

However if media organisations are arguing for a change to the Racial Discrimination Act, they need to match their free speech demands with rock solid accountability in regard to accuracy in reporting. Currently it's largely traditions of professional practice such as journalists' fact checking that is holding them to account. These are mirrored in the codes of the government and industry regulators such as ACMA and the Press Council, which offending media often treat with derision.

In this context, it is regrettable that there are demands for less — rather than more — accountability for accuracy in reporting. During the week, the Australian Financial Review covered demands for a weakening of accuracy codes, by a lobby group representing the half Murdoch owned pay TV operator Foxtel.

The Australian Subscription Television and Radio Association (ASTRA) made the demands in a submission to the Contemporary Community Safeguards Inquiry that is being undertaken by the government media regulator ACMA. ASTRA claimed that it is often difficult for 24 hour news channels such as Sky News Australia to assess the reliability of information in a fast-moving rolling news coverage.

The old days of verifying information through several sources before publishing are gone. This calls for a new form of accuracy, including transparency about the state of knowledge, the nature of any source being relied on, as well as the capacity to clarify information as a story develops.

ASTRA is correct. Unverified YouTube video of atrocities in Syria may be all a news channel has to go on. However it only misleads viewers if an apparent atrocity is reported as

AUSTRALIA

Empowered shock jocks must also be accountable

Subscriber login