Complaints Report: 2002

MORRISON VS TIMES COLONIST

ADJUDICATION OF THE B.C. PRESS COUNCIL

The B.C. Press Council dismisses with reservations a complaint laid by Don Morrison against the Victoria Times Colonist newspaper.

The complaint followed a May 28, 2002 column written by Les Leyne about the resignation of Morrison from his position as B.C. Police Complaints Commissioner.

Leyne's column summarized the proceedings of a provincial legislative committee's review of the commission and in particular, the testimony of commission employees that alleged severe dysfunction in their office and inappropriate conduct by the commissioner. Morrison also testified before the committee, denying the allegations and providing refuting evidence.

Morrison maintained the newspaper and Leyne displayed bias against him and contravened two sections of the Press Council's Code of Practice, the first being Section 2 -- Opportunity to Reply -- which states: "Newspapers should give individuals and organizations a fair and timely opportunity to reply to inaccuracies when the issue is of significant importance or when reasonably called for."

This portion of the code is intended to provide a guideline for newspapers to follow after an inaccuracy has been published, which is not the case here, since Morrison complained he was not contacted for comment prior to the column being published.

Leyne pointed out he had called Morrison five time in previous weeks, requesting comment on various aspects of the hearing but Morrison declined on each occasion.

The Press Council dismisses this portion of the complaint, further finding the complainant provided no evidence he attempted to contact Leyne after the column was published, nor did the complainant write a letter to the editor setting out his concerns.

The Council noted however that while it is not the exclusive responsibility of a newspaper to suggest a letter to the editor as an avenue of reply, had this suggestion been made by the paper, the complaint might have been dealt with at an early stage.

Morrison also maintained that the Times Colonist contravened Section 4 of the Code of Practice, which directs newspapers and journalists to "strive to avoid expressing comment and conjecture as established fact." He said Leyne raised allegations to fact in his May 28 column.

The column began with the words, "Backed by dozens of pages of testimony raising questions...." This clearly indicates to the reader that the columnist is writing about a well-publicized hearing at which allegations were made by testifying witnesses.

The Council also noted that Leyne did state in the May 28 column that Morrison "tried to rebut as many of the claims against him as he could..."

The Council has tow minor reservations, involving what the writer acknowledged was a "clumsy" attribution and a phrase that included a reference to the "hard truth." While the columnist agreed that this was his opinion, the wording was such that it could have caused some readers to be unclear as to who was making the determination of truth since the police commissioner's resignation relieved the legislative committee of issuing a statement or decision on the evidence it heard.

If the column had been written in isolation, the Council might have given its reservations greater weight.

However, the May 28 column was the last in a series of opinion pieces written by Leyne on the subject, one of which detailed Morrison's denials.

As well, there were extensive news reports carried in the Times Colonist as the hearing proceeded, concluding with a May 28 front-page article on Morrison's resignation that included his comments.

The complainant sought to apply to a columnist the standards of objectivity and balance that are more broadly expected of a news reporter. The Council noted that its Code of Practice explicitly acknowledges that the expression of opinions in newspapers are to be given the widest possible latitude. That means a columnist's expressed opinions do not have to be neutral, objective or balanced in the same manner as news stories.

Indeed the very nature of forming an opinion is to assess information and then take a particular stand or viewpoint on an issue.

In this case, Leyne was free to accept or reject the evidence or testimony of a source or witness, and to say so.

This he did, while also making it clear that his opinions were being drawn from what he saw and heard at a public legislative committee meeting.

Complaints by year | Complaints by paper | Top