| |
|
|
|
|
       
|
Complaints Report: 2003BRYN MACKWORTH VS. BURNABY NEWSLEADER The British Columbia Press Council has upheld a complaint against the Burnaby NewsLeader from Bryn Mackworth, the sister-in-law of a murder victim whose death was the subject of a reporter's story in the news pages. The Press Council upheld Coquitlam resident Bryn Mackworth's complaint that the death of her brother-in-law was wrongly linked to "gang activity". The story accurately quoted an RCMP spokesperson as saying the shooting death in Burnaby of Brian William Paskalidis, on Oct. 8, 2002, had the characteristics of a "professional hit". It was a targeted murder. However, the NewsLeader story four days later opened as follows: "Burnaby's immunity from the gang violence that's plaguing other cities in the Lower Mainland appears to have run out. On Tuesday Burnaby recorded its fourth murder of 2002 and likely the third of the year related to gang activity." And the story concluded with two paragraphs giving details of "two previous murders police have tied to the gang violence that has swamped Lower Mainland police forces." Mackworth's complaint alleged that linking the murder to gang activity was a breach of Article 1 of the Council's Code of Practice which reads, "ACCURACY: A newspaper's first duty is to provide the public with accurate information. Newspapers should correct inaccuracies promptly". The Council agrees there was such a breach. And it took particular notice in this case of how opportunity to correct the record was lost because of unfortunate assumptions by both the complainant and the newspaper, and the newspaper's unfortunate lack of familiarity with the Press Council's procedures. The Council's public hearing in Richmond on Feb. 21 opened with NewsLeader reporter Michael McQuillan expressing regret. He conceded that he had been influenced by "off the record" remarks by unidentified police officers and he acknowleged that these remarks were "speculative" in nature. He further acknowledged that he would not in future be influenced by "off the record" comments. Later in the hearing NewsLeader editor Greg Knill said that with hindsight the newspaper would not have drawn such a tight link to gangland activity and that such an assumption should not have been made by the newspaper. The Press Council took these and other statements from the newspaper as a laudable open recognition of its error. It noted too that editor Knill spoke of "ample room for a follow-up story" that could set the record straight. The Council believes the complaint could very probably have been resolved earlier, either by the parties themselves or through the Council's mediation service. However, unwarranted assumptions by Mackworth and the NewsLeader derailed any such hope. NewsLeader publisher Darlene Osborne told the Council that she would have taken a phone call from Mackworth with "compassion" and would have sought to rectify the problem. However, Mackworth, who said she had been given a cold shoulder by another community newspaper, unfortunately assumed such a call would be fruitless. Mackworth instead complained to Osborne in a letter dated Nov. 11, 2002, and said the victim's family would like to hear from the newspaper. The letter concluded with notations that copies had been sent to the Press Council and to a lawyer. Mackworth testified this was her brother-in-law's lawyer, that she had not consulted with the lawyer and had sent him a copy only so he would be aware of her complaint. Her letter did not convey that information. Osborne told the Council she got the letter Nov. 15 and assumed the lawyer had been formally consulted. That was a reasonable assumption. Osborne consulted with the newspaper's own lawyer and that resulted in the NewsLeader sending to Mackworth a letter on Nov. 18 that both affirmed the original story, and lacked a compassionate tone. After that, according to reporter McQuillan and editor Knill, the NewsLeader assumed that there was nothing it could do but await whatever steps the Press Council took. It is unfortunate that the intrasigent position taken by both parties resulted in a foreclosure of the mediation services that are ordinarily pursued at this stage by the offices of the Press Council. Without the utilization of the process, the complaint lodged by Ms. Mackworth proceeded to a hearing before the Council. The result was the upholding of the complaint since the newspaper was unable to support linking the murder to gang activity. The Council believes that this case underlines the value and potential of its mediation service, which has as its aim mutually satisfactory resolution of complaints, short of public hearings. Indeed the vast majority of complaints in recent times have been resolved through mediation and have not required full hearings. Complaints by year | Complaints by paper | Top The B.C. Press Council has dismissed with reservations a complaint filed against the North Shore News over publication of an editorial cartoon. Complaintant Stephen Reichert during the Nov. 27 hearing cited Section 6 of the Council's Code of Practice, and said the cartoon was racist, encouraged discrimination towards First Nations people and could also be construed as "inciting hatred towards a particular group of people". The cartoon depicted a large home, with satellite dishes, boarded up windows and cars on blocks with the caption: "Treaty negotiations that include West Vancouver's prestigious British Properties make it what may become the poshest of native territories". The complainant sought a published apology to readers and suggested the North Shore News institute staff workshops on racism. The North Shore News defended the publication of the cartoon, citing Section 4 of the Code of Practice, which states newspapers have the right to exercise "the widest possible latitude in expressing opinion, no matter how controversial or unpopular the opinions may be, and to give columnists, editoria cartoonists and others the same latitude in expressing personal opinions". Anna Marie D'Angelo, senior editor of the North Shore News, said she personally did not like the cartoon but noted it was the opinion of the cartoonist, not the newspaper. She said it is the duty of the newspaper to defend freedom of expression and disagreed the cartoon was racist or would encourage discrimination. The Press Council found that the cartoon falls within the parameters of freedom of expression. Editorial cartoon differ from written opinion in that their messages are tempered by interpretation. Cartoons can evoke a reaction and understanding that differs from person to person. While some readers may find that the cartoon in question encourages discrimination, the Council found that other readers might reasonably interpret it in other, less offensive ways. The Council thereby dismisses the complaint, with reservations. While council upholds the paper's right to publish the cartoon, it notes Ms D'Angelo had conceded in hindsight that had she seen the cartoon before publication, she "probably" would not have published it. Accordingly, it would have been appropriate to have published a timely apology to readers who were offended. The newspaper should also have exercised more care in making sure that the material was acceptable before it was published. Council also notes that paper has now instituted an editing system to ensure cartoons are more carefully scrutinized before publication. It is important to define the role and intent of editorial cartooning in the print media. Such cartoons, by their very nature, are designed to provoke and spark discussion. In this regard, it is a matter of record that editorial cartoons can sometimes push the edges of racial and cultural stereotypes. However, a number of high court cases have upheld the right of cartoonists to present honestly held opinions in matters of public interest. This adjudication is not a definitive statement on the acceptability of editorial cartoons but rather deals only with the cartoon cited in this particular case. |
|
|
© BC Press Council 2003-2004 |
||