Independent Media Council Australia logo.

The Independent Media Council was formed in 2012 to handle complaints by readers against funding bodies.





Determination: Richard Titelius v “The West Australian”


Richard Titelius complains about headlines, articles and advertisements in The West Australian in early March 2018 dealing with alcohol.


“PRICE CALL ON BOOZE TO CUT BINGE HARM’ and “WAs BOOZE CULTURE FILLS HOSPITAL EDs” were two headlines and articles juxtaposed with a half page Liquor Stax advertisement for cheap alcohol.


Mr Titelius complains that the use of the terms “booze” and “grog” together with alcohol advertising debase the seriousness of articles about the devastating effects of alcohol abuse.


He also claims hypocrisy and lack of credibility in relation to the proposed banned drinkers register and the views of the Australian Hotels Association.


Whilst we understand Mr Titelius’s sentiment, we cannot find any breach of the Independent Media Council Code of Conduct, nor do we agree that the use of the vernacular imports any greater or lesser meaning or significance to the word alcohol.


For these reasons the complaint is dismissed.




Determination: ‘’An Anonymous Mother” v. The West Australian


On 23 November 2016 ‘The West Australian’ (WAN) published a frontpage headline “15-year-old alleged ‘Mr Big’ of Perth’s meth trade” with the spill over story on page 7. The story concerned a 15 year old boy arrested by police for allegedly selling 100gms of methamphetamine. Colour photographs of the boy appeared on both pages of the report and these were pixelated to obliterate his face.


More than 12 months later the boy’s mother complains that the photographs breached the newspaper’s privacy policy by being poorly pixelated thus allowing him to be easily recognisable. She claims that third parties were able to reveal her son’s identity on the internet by comparing the pixelated photos to his facebook photos. She also says that ‘a year later he is still being recognised in the street and it has had a devastating impact on our family’.


The WAN denies any responsibility for this situation and queries whether the boy’s identity was revealed on the internet in the manner claimed. However it acknowledges that the photos it published came from his facebook page.


The WAN’s privacy policy barred publication of any material from which the boy’s identity could reasonably be ascertained. Because he was a child the WAN had to take ‘special care’ to ensure this did not happen. There was an added requirement for the newspaper take ‘extra care’ by reason of him facing criminal proceedings.


Although the published photos obliterated the boy’s facial features, his lengthy hair and the background details remained untouched. His hair was fairly distinctive, and in our opinion could well have been recognized by people familiar with his facebook photos. In the event of this happening a simple comparison of the published photos with the facebook photos would have confirmed his identity.


Although we are unable to verify that the boy’s identity was in fact revealed in this way, the risk that this might happen was forseeable at the time of publication. For this reason we find that the WAN failed to take ‘special care’ to ensure that publication of the edited facebook photos would not result in revelation of his identity.


This determination is based entirely upon the terms of the WAN’s privacy policy and should not be regarded as a commentary on any legal issues involved.


For these reasons the complaint is upheld.




Determination: Glenn Scott v. The West Australian


On 27 November 2017 The West Australian published a 3 page feature on Azerbaijan under the headline “Baku to the future”.


Glen Scott complains that the article, in relation to corruption in Azerbaijan, breached Media Council guidelines in that it was not honest, accurate and balanced, did not disclose all relevant facts and therefore gave a distorting emphasis.


The article arose out of a trade mission by 28 business people to Azerbaijan,including a journalist, who conducted interviews with participants.


The journalist’s trip was paid for by the Azerbaijan Consulate. This was declared, in the usual way, at the end of the article.


As a result of credible reports in reputable international journals, Azerbaijan has an unenviable reputation as a corrupt dictatorship.


In 2013, the government reportedly declared the election result before voting had started.


Azerbaijan ranks 162 out of 180 countries in the World Press Freedom Index, no doubt because of it’s jailing of journalists, activists and civil rights lawyers.


Azerbaijan ranked 119 out of 168 countries in the 2015 World Bank Corruption Perception Index. Since then a scandal involving $2.9 billion money laundering into offshore accounts of Azerbaijan’s leaders, to be used to buy political influence, has been exposed.”


Some of this was reported in the article, but in a manner favourable to the Azerbaijan government. Generally, the tenor of the article is one of glowing praise for Azerbaijan.


One businessman was quoted as saying that he believes the government has made a concerted effort to address perceptions of corruption.


The article opined “current allegations appear to be political rather than corporate”.


In our opinion, the article was an opinion piece and therefore not subject to the more rigorous requirements of news reporting.


Regardless of whether there was any credible basis for some of the opinions expressed, opinion pieces are about what people think.


The dangers inherent in journalists accepting “freebies” are well illustrated by this article. However, no breach of the Code of Conduct has occurred.


© Independent Media Council 2012