Investigation Report No. 2993
File No. / ACMA2013/310Licensee / Channel Seven Adelaide Pty Ltd
Station / SAS Adelaide
Type of service / Commercial television
Name of program / Today Tonight
Date/s of broadcast / 14 December 2012
Relevant Legislation/Code / Clause 4.3.1 of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2010
Date Finalised / 26.06.13
Decision / No breach of clause 4.3.1 (factual accuracy)
Background
· On 15 March 2013, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (the ACMA) received a complaint concerning a segment of the program Today Tonight broadcast on 14 December 2012 by Channel Seven Adelaide Pty Ltd, the licensee of SAS.
· Today Tonight is a current affairs program and is broadcast at 6.30pm Monday to Friday. On 14December 2012, the relevant segment was introduced as follows:
Well, mobility scooters or gofers have become an essential part of life for elderly or disabled Australians. But there are so many of them on footpaths that the number of accidents causing injury even death are skyrocketing. So the push is on for an urgent safety review as [presenter] reports.
· The segment reported on the current speed limits and licensing requirements for mobility scooters, and questioned whether it is sufficient given that Australia has an aging population and scooter use is increasing.
· The complainant alleged that the segment as a whole “implied that scooter riders lacked licences and insurance” and used the statistics for scooter-related deaths and injuries in the last ten years to “paint scooter riders as hoons with a huge accident rate”. The complainant also submitted that the segment “demonises mobility scooter riders and denigrates them in the eyes of the general public”, and that the overall portrayal was “damaging to scooter riders and their safety”.
· In response, the licensee denied that scooter riders had been misrepresented, and asserted that the segment was about “the capability of some motorised scooters to travel at a speed that can, and does if driven irresponsibly, lead to serious injury”.
Assessment
· This investigation is based on submissions from the complainant, the licensee’s response to the complainant and a copy of the broadcast provided to the ACMA by the licensee. Other sources used have been identified where relevant.
· In assessing content against the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2010 (the Code), the ACMA considers the meaning conveyed by the relevant material. This is assessed according to the understanding of an ‘ordinary reasonable listener/viewer’. Australian courts have considered an ‘ordinary, reasonable reader’ (or listener to viewer) to be:
A person of fair average intelligence, who is neither perverse, nor morbid or suspicious of mind, nor avid for scandal. That person does not live in an ivory tower, but can and does read between the lines in the light of that person’s general knowledge and experience of worldly affairs[1].
· The ACMA examines what would the ‘ordinary reasonable listener/viewer’ have understood this program to have conveyed, in the context of the relevant program segment. It considers the natural, ordinary meaning of the language, context, tenor, tone, inferences that may be drawn, and in the case of factual material, relevant omissions (if any).
· Once this test has been applied to ascertain the meaning of the broadcast material, it is for the ACMA to determine whether there has been a breach of the Code.
· The ACMA has considered the licensee’s compliance with clause 4.3.1 of the Code:
4.3 In broadcasting news and current affairs programs, licensees:
4.3.1 must broadcast factual material accurately and represent viewpoints fairly, having regard to the circumstances at the time of preparing and broadcasting the program
4.3.1.1 An assessment of whether the factual material is accurate is to be determined in the context of the segment in its entirety.
· As Today Tonight is a current affairs program and not a news program, the ACMA has not considered the licensee’s compliance with the impartiality requirement in clause 4.4.1 of the Code that applies only to news programs.
Issues: Factual accuracy
Finding
The licensee did not breach clause 4.3.1 of the Code.
Reasons
· The ACMA notes that the segment focused on the public danger caused by mobility scooters if ridden on footpaths at speeds above 10 km per hour (the legal speed limit). The segment:
o featured interviews with spokespersons from the Pedestrian Council and National Seniors Australia, and a New South Wales MP, who discussed the speed and manner that mobility scooters are currently ridden on footpaths, and whether increased regulation or licensing would be in the public interest
o quoted the statistic that, “between 2000 and 2010 mobility scooters have been linked to 62 deaths and over 700 injuries requiring hospitalisation”
o presented the story of a person who had been hospitalised as the result of an accident with a scooter that police believe had been travelling at 15 km per hour
o included footage of scooters travelling on footpaths at speeds between 10 and 15 km per hour
o featured vox pop style interviews with several scooter riders who talked about how their scooters helped them live an active life, the manner with which people rode scooters on the footpath and whether a licensing system for scooter riding should be introduced.
· The ACMA considers that the segment as a whole did not convey the impression that scooter riders in general are irresponsible or are a public danger. In this regard, it is noted that some scooter riders in the segment acknowledged how irresponsible scooter riding could affect the safety of others:
o One scooter rider commented on the injuries that could be caused if a scooter was ridden over the 10 km per hour speed limit.
Reporter: We’ve got you at 12 [km per hour]. Would you worry about hitting someone at that speed?
Scooter rider: Oh yeah.
Reporter: Make a mess, couldn’t it?
Scooter rider: Oh yeah, it would make a big mess.
o Another scooter rider expressed concern when told that she had been riding at 11 km per hour on the footpath:
11 kay. Really? Mmmm, oh dear.
o Another four riders (not shown exceeding the 10 km per hour speed limit) commented that some riders ride in an irresponsible and dangerous manner:
They are lunatics ...and they just go hell for leather
I’ve seen a terrible lot of people who are driving that shouldn’t be
Well, I’ve had them run into me
A lot of the people are very old, some are deaf, and they don’t hear and they just sit on it and go
· For these reasons, the ACMA is satisfied that the segment presented factual material accurately in accordance with clause 4.3.1 of the Code.
ACMA Investigation Report 2993 –Today Tonight– SAS – 14 December 2012
[1] Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited v Marsden (1998) 43 NSWLR 158 at 164–167.