University of South Australia The Law of Media and Communications LAWS 2031 SCHOOL OF LAW INTERNAL STUDENT ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET First Family Student ID Student’s Name: Suzanne STONE 100000922 THIRD ASSIGNMENT Title: Media Regulations Word length required 1200 Actual word length 1181 Due date: 6/12/15 Submitted date: 5/12/15 I declare that the work contained in this assignment is my own, except where acknowledgement of sources is made. I authorise the University to test any work submitted by me, using text comparison software, for instances of plagiarism. I understand this may involve the University or its contractor copying my work and storing it on a database to be used in future to test work submitted by others. Note: The attachment of this statement on any electronically submitted assignments will be deemed to have the same authority as a signed statement ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15
Embed
STONE Suzanne 3rd Assignment Media Law 2015 - Feedback version (HD)
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
University of South Australia The Law of Media and Communications
LAWS 2031
SCHOOL OF LAW INTERNAL STUDENT ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET
First Family Student ID
Student’s Name: Suzanne STONE 100000922
THIRD ASSIGNMENT
Title: Media Regulations
Word length required 1200 Actual word length 1181
Due date: 6/12/15
Submitted date: 5/12/15
I declare that the work contained in this assignment is my own, except where
acknowledgement of sources is made. I authorise the University to test any work submitted
by me, using text comparison software, for instances of plagiarism. I understand this may
involve the University or its contractor copying my work and storing it on a database to be
used in future to test work submitted by others.
Note: The attachment of this statement on any electronically submitted assignments will be deemed to have the same authority as a signed statement
Suzanne Stone Final Research Media/Communications Law ID 100000922
Assignment
2
1. Explore how Australia should frame future media regulation generally.
2. What do you think of the suggestions of Finkelstein and Boreham? Leave it as is and
allow the Courts to put on notice new media for egregious behaviour? Or, follow the
reports and set up a one-stop-shop regulatory body?
INTRODUCTION
In this era of the 24-hour news cycle, headlines, profits and sales are increasingly taking
precedence over journalistic integrity, quality, and accountability in news and commentary.1
Radio and television content has always been independently regulated, whereas print has been
self-regulated. In recent years, broadcasters and print alike have increasingly used the Internet
not only for their own website, but also via social media applications such as Twitter and
Facebook. This brief essay will outline what has been identified and recommended in recent
media inquiries with respect to content standard in news and commentary. From this,
recommendations are provided on how the media industry should move forward.
THE INQUIRIES
Outline tasks that were set for, and the finding of, the two inquiries mentioned above.
Since the UK News of the World scandal came to light in 2009,2 there have been three inquiries
into media regulation, of which recommendations were made with respect to content standards
in all forms of media, with the exception of the most recent inquiry,3 The Finkelstein Report4
included media practices and codes of practice; how they related to the convergence to new
media; the quality of news; and how to strengthen the Australian Press Council’s powers.5 It
recommended to establish an independent regulatory body to set journalistic standards, and
handle complaints with respect to breaching those standards.6 Its investigation found that
although the Internet is second only to television as the main source of news,7 there is still no
threat of existence for the Australian press.8
Although the press went to considerable pains in their submissions to this inquiry that their
self-regulation on content standard is sufficient,9 the inquiry found the level of trust,10 bias, and
confidence in journalists and the media as an institution much lower than for other professions
and institutions. This was particularly felt towards newspapers.11 Research found that the
1 Rhonda Breit, Professional Communication: Legal and Ethical Issues (LexisNexis Butterworths 6th ed 2011)
434. 2 Indu Chandrasekhar, Murray Wardrop and Andy Trotman, Phone Hacking: Timeline of the Scandal, The
Telegraph, (23 July 2012) < http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/8634176/Phone-hacking-
timeline-of-a-scandal.html>. 3 Joint Select Committee on Broadcasting Legislation, Three Broadcasting Reform Proposals, (Commonwealth
2013). 4 R. Finkelstein & M. Ricketson, Report of the Independent Inquiry into Media and Media Regulation,
(Commonwealth 2012). Presented to the Minister dated 28 February 2013. 5 Ibid 7-11. 6 Ibid 8. 7 Australian Communications and Media Authority [‘ACMA’], ‘Digital Australians—Expectations about media
in a converging media environment’ (2011) cited in Finkelstein Report of the Independent Inquiry, 90 8 Finkelstein, Report of the Independent Inquiry, 101. 9 Ibid 103 10 Ibid 106-10, 123 11 Ibid 123, 157
Suzanne Stone Final Research Media/Communications Law ID 100000922
Assignment
3
public widely viewed (a) the reporting of news to be unfair, inaccurate and unbalanced;12 and
(b) there is an alarming difference in opinions between journalists and the public with respect
to privacy and deception.13 They are commonly used by politicians, police and other public
officials for their own use; and in their hunger for “exclusives”, journalists often failed to verify
their stories and sources. In losing credibility, they failed being the independent “watchdog” in
this democratic society and their rights for journalistic privilege.14 In summary, the results were
concerning, and urgently needs improvement.15
The second report (Convergence Report: Final Report) 16 investigated among other matters,
media content standards,17 and recommending all media platforms should be of a standard
expected by the Australian public.18 It concluded that a policy framework should be built to
regulate “significant enterprises” based on size and scope regardless of media platform and
subject to regulation. However, this would not include social media and other user-generated
content.19 Regarding news and commentary, this report agreed with the Finkelstein Report on
its recommendations, except rather being a statutory body, it should be self-regulated with
industry-led members developing and enforcing a media code aimed at promoting news
standards, adjudicating complaints, and providing timely remedies. 20 The report noted that
content standards is currently regulated through multiple bodies depending on the provider and
media platform with varying degrees of standard and power, with only the ABC21 and SBS22
being legislatively regulated.23 Therefore, it recommended the absorption of the Australian
Press Council and ACMA24 in news and commentary, covering all media platforms.25
In 2013, the third report was published. It did not review content standard or the convergence
of media, but it did recommend that ACMA be given power to compel on-air reporting on its
findings.26
DISCUSSION
Describe how you would tackle, from a policy perspective, the need for a regulatory
framework that is capable of covering all forms of media including new media.
In spite of all current professional media representative bodies showing commitment to a policy
framework on content standard, as identified in the Finkelstein Report, the community has
12 Ibid 113 [4.39], 124 [4.79] 13 Denis Joseph Andrew Muller, Media Accountability in a Liberal Democracy—An Examination of the Harlot’s Prerogative (PhD Thesis, University of Melbourne, 2005) cited in in Finkelstein, Report of the Independent
Inquiry, 117-18 [4.56], 124 [4.80] 14 Ibid 116 15 Finkelstein, Report of the Independent Inquiry, 124 [4.81] 16 Senator the Hon Stephen Conroy, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy,
‘Government moves to ensure quality Australian content stays on Australian television,’ (Media Release, 30
November 2012) cited in Finkelstein, Report of the Independent Inquiry, 2; Convergence Review: Final Report
(Commonwealth 2012). 17 Convergence Review: Final Report (Commonwealth 2012) viii. 18 Ibid. 19 Ibid ix. 20 Ibid x, 38. 21 Australian Broadcasting Corporation. 22 Special Broadcasting Service. 23 Convergence Review: Final Report (Commonwealth 2012) 52. 24 Australian Communication and Media Authority 25 Convergence Review: Final Report (Commonwealth 2012) xiv. 26 Ibid v
Suzanne Stone Final Research Media/Communications Law ID 100000922
Assignment
4
found the actual practice to this commitment falling well short. It found that the Broadcasting
Services Act 1991 is not sufficient to handle all media complaints within their jurisdiction.27
Currently, the only remedy against defamation and other egregious behaviour, particularly
against newspapers, is civil suits. Even though defamation is legislated, it is an extremely
expensive, lengthy, complicated, and stressful process for the plaintiffs. 28 It does not allow a
speedy redress,29 and the defending media would invariably draw proceedings out utilising
expensive counsels, raising preliminary disputes, calling many witnesses and lengthy cross-
examinations. If the plaintiff is not successful, not only would they be consigned with their
own legal expenses that could be as high as $500,000, but also left paying the respondent’s
legal costs which would very likely be even higher.30 Although there have been successful
examples of individuals winning defamation cases against large corporations,31 on the whole,
the complexity and extraordinary costs easily discourages vulnerable individuals to sue, thus
allowing journalists and publishers to continue with near impunity.32 When making complaints
to self-regulating bodies, there is invariably no power to enforce any compelling remedy or
compensation other than to remove the member from that organisation33 thus no real protection
for the vulnerable general public.
There is very little difference between media platforms with respect to investigative
journalism.34 Both newspapers and broadcasters are now using online methods of
communication that are usually sourced from the original whether it be by podcast, video or
written article. Ultimately, all media platforms face the same concerns regarding content
standard. Accordingly, similar to the Finkelstein Report, it is recommended that an independent
statutory body be legislated with robust powers to investigate, enforce, and hear breaches of
content standard across all media platforms. The principles and code of editorial standards
would be no more restrictive than what already exists and to which media already pledge to
commit such as MEAA Journalist Code of Ethics, 35 ABC’s Code of Practice,36 and ABC’s
Editorial Policies, Principles and Standards.37
The existing ACMA could be an expanded with a disciplinary body fashioned like that to the
South Australian Passenger Transport Standards Committee.38 It is also recommended that like
many other professions of importance and accountability, journalists should be accredited and
held to account. Likewise, all publishers including print be licenced. Appendix A, provides a
draft amendment bill regarding the aforementioned. It is a compilation of portions from the
Passenger Transport Act 1994 (SA) 1994 and the Broadcasting Services Act 1994 (Cth). This
provides a skeleton framework upon which it can be further developed. Its associated
rules/laws and content standards would be detailed in the Regulations and Code of Conduct
which are not included at this time.
27 Finkelstein, Report of the Independent Inquiry, 179 [6.60]. 28 Finkelstein, Report of the Independent Inquiry, 147 [5.90]. 29 Ibid 151 [5.103]. 30 Ibid 152 [5.107]. 31 Duffy v Google, [2015] SASR 170. 32 Ibid 152 [5.107] – [5.110]. 33 Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance, How to Make a Complaint (2015) < https://www.meaa.org/what-we-
believe/media-regulation/how-to-make-a-complaint/>. 34 Finkelstein, Report of the Independent Inquiry, 157 [6.1]. 35 Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance, Journalist Code of Ethics (2015) < https://www.meaa.org/what-we-
believe/media-regulation/>. 36 Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Code of Practice 2011 (Revised 2014) (ABC 2014). 37 Australian Broadcasting Corporation, ABC Editorial Policies – Principles and Standards, (ABC 2011). 38 Passenger Transport Act 1994 (SA) Div 5, 6