"Facts are in the way of opinions" Allan Gus Jones.

------------------------

So, should Australia’s TV and Radio watchdog the ACMA be allowed to force radio shock jocks like Alan Jones to ensure their so-called ‘facts’ are right? 

Or should he be allowed to claim whatever he wants?

Last week the ACMA upheld two complaints against factual errors made by Jones in broadcasts last October. 

Here is one. 


ALAN JONES: Fifteen hundred people in the Department of Climate Change earning a minimum of 135,000 dollars a year. Two hundred and thirty federal bureaucrats earning more than the Prime Minister. Six new federal agencies supporting carbon tax legislation. One thousand and twenty seven staff on the Climate Change Authority. Green agencies around Australia recruiting new staff at the rate of a thousand a year. You want facts? I’ll give you facts!

— 2GB, The Alan Jones Breakfast Show, 23rd October, 2012

Unfortunately for Jones, the first fact in that list was wrong. 

The minimum wage in the Department of Climate Change appears to be nearer $40,000. 

Jones also got his facts wrong in another broadcast just days earlier naming six power stations he said were being closed by the carbon tax.

One was not being closed at all. And another was certainly not being shut down for that reason. 

As its owner Alinta Energy had already emphasised months before .


The decision is not being made because of the price on carbon. 

— Media Release, Alinta Energy, 20th April, 2012

Now you may think those are fairly trivial mistakes and not worth a year’s investigation 

But Jones and 2GB are serial offenders so there’s rather more at stake. 

In the past 3 years, the ACMA has produced 25 investigations involving 2GB’s Alan Jones, Ray Hadley or Chris Smith and from our calculations, found 18 breaches of the radio codes or standards at the station. 

That makes 2GB the worst station by far. 

And not only is Alan Jones the biggest offender, he was already on extra fact-checking duty when the latest breach took place. 

In June 2012 he had been found to be in breach of the code for claiming that humans were responsible for only .001 per cent of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which was wrong by a factor of 30,000. 

As a result the ACMA had negotiated a settlement with 2GB which involved : 


New measures applying to programs hosted by Alan Jones

— Media Release, ACMA, 18th October, 2012

And specifically which promised ...


Pre-broadcast fact-checking by the program’s executive producer of any material provided by non-media sources or third parties ...

— Media Release, ACMA, 18th October, 2012

That extra fact-checking agreement was made only days before one of these latest breaches. 

And last month we caught Jones being loose with the truth again, repeating claims about the IPCC report on climate change that had already been corrected by the Australian and Daily Telegraph and highlighted by Media Watch 

So, it’s pretty clear that this policing of radio accuracy is not working. 

2GB hates it and is threatening legal action, the ACMA is frustrated, and the complaints change nothing. 

So what can be done to fix it? Or should it be scrapped? 

Well, the ACMA wants more powers. 

As it noted last week: 


The ACMA cannot ‘fine’ a broadcaster for breaching a code, or direct it to do any particular thing or take any particular action ... 

— Media Release, ACMA, 23rd October, 2013

It also said ...


... the ACMA notes that its regulatory relationship is only with the broadcasting licensee and not with any individual presenter.

— Media Release, ACMA, 23rd October, 2013

In fact short of taking away 2GB’s licence, which it would never do, the ACMA can do very little. 

It can’t discipline Jones and it can’t require correction of mistakes or acknowledgement of its findings, even though other regulators in the world possess that power.

Yet it’s not for lack of asking. 

In 2000, the Australian Broadcasting Authority called for it in its commercial radio inquiry .


The following year the Department of Communications canvassed it .

Four years later a a report for the ABA by Professor Ian Ramsay agreed it was necessary.

And in 2005 the Department of Communications said it should be considered.

Seven years after that, the Finkelstein Inquiry and the Convergence Review both argued a new media regulator should have the power. 

And just four months ago, the Joint Select Committee on Broadcasting Legislationrecommended it too. 

So why has the ACMA been denied it? 

One highly-placed source told Media Watch ...


Perhaps the politicians in Canberra don’t want to upset the shock jocks. 

— Industry insider, Statement to Media Watch, 25th October, 2013

Now, whether that’s right or not, the commercial radio stations have certainly opposed it.

They want the ACMA to have less power rather than more. 

And they don’t like the rules on Fairness and Accuracy. 

In July Commercial Radio Australia told a new ACMA inquiry that the fact-checking requirement:


... is at times too onerous, impinges on editorial freedom and is open to abuse by complainants. 

— Commercial Radio Australia, Submission to Contemporary Community Safeguards Inquiry, 29th July, 2013

Commercial Radio Australia also suggested that talkback hosts like Alan Jones and Ray Hadley should be exempt from fact checking rules...


While CRA accepts that a Code for Accuracy is appropriate for news programs, and possibly for current affairs programs, it certainly is not appropriate for general talkback programs. 

— Commercial Radio Australia, Submission to Contemporary Community Safeguards Inquiry, 29th July, 2013

Now as it happens, the commercial radio code does not require talkback hosts to get their facts right. It simply asks them to make reasonable efforts to do so. 

And if they make a mistake they can avoid breaching the code – which is written by the industry – by correcting the record within 30 days.

It’s really not so hard. 

So we asked a number of radio hosts how important they thought it was to get their facts right. 

We got no replies from Jones, Hadley or 2GB

But John Stanley of Sydney’s 2UE told us accuracy was: 


Very important. An absolute must. 

— John Stanley, Presenter, 2UE 25th October, 2013

Paul Murray of Perth’s 6PR told us 


Accuracy is important in any form of journalism.

— Paul Murray, Presenter, 6PR 25th October, 2013

And the ABC’s Jon Faine in Melbourne was just as adamant.


It’s everything. If the audience can’t rely on us, can’t trust us, why would they listen to us? 

— Jon Faine, Presenter, ABC 774, 25th October, 2013

So why might it be unreasonable for a watchdog to demand that Jones and his fellow shock jocks try to get their facts right?

The answer perhaps lies in a comment from the Institute of Public Affairs, whose legal director Simon Breheny told The Australian last week ...


ACMA's ruling against Alan Jones is unacceptable in a liberal democracy. This latest decision is a political attack by ACMA bureaucrats against conservative views on climate change

— The Australian Online, 24th October, 2013

In that same interview, the IPA’s Breheny urged Tony Abbott to get rid of the media watchdog immediately.


Shutting down ACMA would be a significant victory for freedom of speech in Australia.

— The Australian Online, 24th October, 2013

We doubt the new Government would go that far but the Minister for Communications, Malcolm Turnbull told Media Watch in a statement this afternoon ...

The Government has a general deregulation agenda, through which we intend to reduce the burden of regulation across the economy by $1 billion a year. In the radio sector, this will involve reviewing the existing regulatory framework to see which regulations are out of date, overlap or could otherwise be streamlined and made more efficient. 

— Malcolm Turnbull, Minister for Communications, Email to Media Watch, 28th October, 2013

We think having a watchdog with powers to police fairness and accuracy is justified. 

The shock jocks get people riled. They have a big audience. And they talk about matters of public importance. Not about aliens. 

We think it’s important for democracy and public debate that they get their facts right.

But it’s also important for democracy they can then say whatever they like. 

And the commercial radio code does not shut down freedom of speech or force shock jocks to be balanced. 

It simply requires commercial radio stations to make reasonable efforts to offer a range of significant viewpoints. 

The rules covering the ABC are much, much tougher and we seem to do ok. 

Now you may argue that commercial radio should not be regulated at all because IT gets nothing from the taxpayer. 

But 2GB has a guaranteed slot on the dial and a licence worth many millions of dollars. 

And it’s perfectly reasonable to ask that it repays the community by delivering honesty, accuracy and fairness in public debate.

So we’d like to see regulation made to work. And we have two suggestions.

First that the ACMA be given more power not to investigate. 

It’s crazy to spend a year on trivial complaints. And it’s a waste of time for all concerned. 

Second, that the watchdog be given some teeth. Allow the ACMA to force broadcasters to acknowledge and correct their mistakes. 

And allow it to impose fines on serial offenders as the British regulator Ofcom is able to do. 

Finally, it would help if 2GB took its responsibilities more seriously. 

Six weeks ago Channel Nine’s A Current Affair was found to have breached the TV code with a story that a shopping mall in Sydney had been overtaken by Asians.

ACMA recommended it acknowledge that breach on air. And thanks to Channel Nine boss David Gyngell, it did. 


... we would like to acknowledge that the ACMA has determined that our segment entitled All Asian Mall was found to have breached the code of practice in three areas. 

The ACMA has made a number of findings in their report; a copy of the report can be found on the ACMA website which is shown on your screen.

A Current Affair apologises for any offence caused by this segment and Nine accepts the report’s findings. 

— Channel Nine, A Current Affair, 13th September, 2013

It wasn’t the best apology in the world because it did not go into any detail of the sins they committed.

And we’re not suggesting A Current Affair will never sin again. 

But it is a start. If broadcasters are forced to admit their mistakes on air, it will surely make them a little bit more careful about making them in the first place. 

And as always you can read more about this story on our website, including a number of other responses from broadcasters about accuracy and regulation.

But for now that’s all from us. We’ll be back next week but until then Goodbye.

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3878780.htm

--------------------------------------------------

It is telling that the first comment by "viewers" is about MW's "obsession with Alan Jones"... But really when Allan wield so much power on the mind on the gullible, with opinions that are fact-less, when Allan pays no regard to ACMA and most of the 2GB outfit ignore proper broadcasting standards, one has no choice but to be obsessed on some of the subjects the shock jocks tackle...