Aunty’s media botch

On one side of Harris Street, in inner Sydney is the state-of-the-art headquarters of the ABC, with turnover in 2004 of just under $900m. Directly ­opposite is the Australian Centre for Independent Journalism, a small self-funded research centre at the journalism school of the ­University of Technology. So close are the buildings, ACIJ students can peer into the ABC offices, and vice versa. But lately the two bodies haven’t been seeing eye to eye.

As a source says: “It’s like two fortified castles with a moat in between.” And the ACIJ minnows have won the first round.

The ACIJ took the ABC to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal this year over the broadcaster’s refusal to disclose information about its complaints process. Embarrassingly for the ABC, the centre is running its case ­without paying professional lawyers, instead relying on its own legally trained journalist, Wendy Bacon.

The stand-off started with a freedom-of-information request by the centre for all documents relating to public complaints about ABC coverage of Middle Eastern affairs between 2000 and 2004. ACIJ director Chris Nash says they hit a brick wall. The ABC refused to release the letters, claiming to do so would interfere with complainants’ confidentiality. Nash says the ACIJ offered to see the letters with names blacked out, but the ABC still refused.

The ABC invoked exemptions in the FOI Act covering ­documents relating to programs and program material. But in an initial ­ruling, AAT senior member Mason Allen said he found it “ironic that the [ABC], who normally could be expected to be insisting on platitudes such as ‘the public’s right to know’, should seek exemption in ... technicalities”.

The ABC’s legal team also claimed the FOI application would “substantially and unreasonably” divert its resources. The only practicable way for the ABC to complete its task, the broadcaster claimed, was to employ an additional person at an estimated cost of $17,917.38. Allen questioned this sum, and also noted the ABC’s revenue from ordinary activities of $880.6m: “Against this sum the amount of $17,917.38 is hardly substantial.”

But has the case already cost the ABC more than $17,917 to defend, given the use of a senior and junior counsel, and a team of solicitors? Probably: a senior counsel in Sydney conservatively costs $8000 a day, and a junior $4000. Proceedings have so far taken a day of ­preliminaries and a day in court. It is a point Kirsten McLiesh, ABC head of audience and consumer affairs, doesn’t deny: “You can see there’s quite a lot of resources there.”

Even if the ABC decides not to appeal, the case is likely to continue on other points of law in the AAT.

McLiesh claims a principle is at stake: “We want people to feel they can correspond with us, voice their legitimate concerns, and have those dealt with by us properly, without fearing it’s going to be disclosed elsewhere.”

Email this web page to a friend