Press Council dismisses Age complaint

THE Australian Press Council has dismissed a complaint by Pam Hopf and Dina Burgess against The Age concerning four articles by the newspaper′s Jerusalem correspondent. The articles were published on June 4, June 6, June 11 and June 29 in 2005 and carried the correspondent′s byline and photograph. The first article carried reports of a "stunned" reaction by Israelis to a documentary made by a prominent television presenter. The article said the documentary dwelt on the machinery of occupation, the roadblocks, the fences, walls, settler roads and curfews set up to defend and support West Bank and Gaza settlements. The second article reported plans by Israel to evict 1000 Arabs from their homes in the village of Silwan in East Jerusalem, to clear the way for an "archaeological park". The article said this highlighted the fundamental conflict between resident Palestinians and the Jews who claimed an older and superior right to the ground on which the Palestinians lived. The third article reported activities by a volunteer Israeli women′s organisation that monitored checkpoint operations to ensure Palestinians were not abused. The final article reported that the family of a British peace activist shot by an Israeli soldier believed the soldier, who has been convicted, could be used as a scapegoat by Israeli military officers. The complainants said that all four articles breached a number of Press Council principles including errors of fact, omission, a failure to distinguish between fact and opinion, a lack of balance and that each of the articles presented the conflict in the Middle East from the Palestinian position alone. They said that the inclusion of relevant background material such as the continuing incitement and terrorism against Israelis was required for balance. The complainants claimed that there was a serious lack of objectivity and balance in the articles, which contributed to public hostility to Israel and to anti-Semitism. In response, the newspaper said the articles complained of contained no errors of fact, were balanced and focused on specific aspects of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The newspaper said it was not possible to canvass the entire sweep of the conflict′s history in any single newspaper article. The articles sought to place the incidents and statements described within the context of a violent struggle in which "grave human rights abuses are committed by actors on both sides". The newspaper said that more than 160 reports in 2005 had been published from their Jerusalem correspondent plus additional material from agencies and other newspapers. It had given a fair and comprehensive coverage on the conflict in the Middle East over many years. The reporting of any conflict will inevitably evoke contending points of view in which the facts are strongly disputed. However, reviewing the articles complained of, and hearing the supporting argument of the complainants and the newspaper, the council believes the journalist concerned was reporting matters occurring in Israeli-Palestinian territories at that time and that the articles did not consist of comment. The articles need to be considered in the context of all material that is published on the Middle East conflict by the newspaper. The council does not believe there has been any breach of its principles and accordingly the complaint is dismissed.