‘Significantly inaccurate and misleading’: Canberra Times article about Centrelink debt ‘debacle’ breached Press Council codes
The Canberra Times has been reprimanded for its print article headed ‘Another debt debacle’ and online article ‘Centrelink hits 21,000 families with bogus FTB [Family Tax Benefit] debts’ for being “significantly inaccurate and misleading”.
The Department of Human Services lodged the complaint with the Australian Press Council after the Fairfax-owned publication claimed “bogus” debt notices were sent in “error” to 21,000 families – something the article deemed a “debacle”.
The article in question
The article reported on Centrelink’s “Family Tax Benefit recovery effort” and drew attention to the approximately “21,400 of the [65,000] families hit with the debt notices [who] were able to prove they owed Centrelink nothing” – which the complainant contended was inaccurate and misleading.
The department clarified that 21,000 debt notices were sent to people who receive the benefit if they or their partner had failed to lodge an income tax return, or did not properly notify the department that they were not required to do so. The law, the department noted, considers a debt to exist in these circumstances, rendering the article’s language around “bogus” and “errors” inaccurate.
The department said the practice reported in the article had operated for many years and that beneficiaries are fully and repeatedly advised of the arrangements and their obligations. It added that the article’s front page placement and its ‘debacle’ headline gave prominence to these inaccuracies.
The article’s statements around the federal government conceding it had issued bogus debt notices and blamed the error on “its clients’ failure to ‘engage'” implied the government agreed there had ben an error, when in fact the notices were lawful and correct, the complaint said.
The complainant said it was given no opportunity to respond to the assertions in the article prior to publication and, following publication, was denied a correction or letter to the editor in response, according to the Press Council.
Fairfax responded, sticking by its description of the “bogus” debts, contending it was accurate because the debts never really existed. It said debts proven not to be owed could be legitimately described as “bogus”.
It justified the article’s front page placement, arguing it duly reflects the gravity of a government agency demanding money from more than 21,000 Australian families on a ‘false premise’.
The Press Council ruled that the publication failed to take reasonable steps to ensure accuracy by describing the approximately 21,000 debts as “bogus” and sent in “error”, given the debts’ origins and the processes surrounding them had been explained.
The council said given the information had entered the public domain via a parliamentary inquiry, there was no need for the publication seek the complainant’s comment prior to publication, because the journalist could use the existing statements and explanations.
The press watchdog ruled however that general principle one (“ensure that factual material in news reports and elsewhere is accurate and not misleading, and is distinguishable from other material such as opinion” and two (“provide a correction or other adequate remedial action if published material is significantly inaccurate or misleading”) had been breached.
Linkedin
Pretty shoddy form the writer didn’t get it right in the first place – not the first time the truth has been sacrificed in the race for a cheap headline.
User ID not verified.