Skip to content
1981
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Australian Journalism Review
  4. Volume 44, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 44, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 0810-2686
  • E-ISSN: 2517-620X

Abstract

Australia currently has fourteen standards schemes that oversee journalists and news media, making for both duplication and inconsistency. The result is a torn and frayed patchwork leaving broadcasting heavily regulated but some areas of online content without any applicable standards or clear avenues for consumer complaint. In this article, we describe Australia’s confusion of news media standards schemes amid the global challenges to media oversight in a digital age, including from the algorithmically driven delivery of news via social media and other digital services. We argue that internationally the ongoing disruption of news media is being accompanied by a parallel disruption of news media standards schemes. This creates significant uncertainty, particularly since citizens and journalists have contrasting expectations about news media oversight. However, this uncertainty also presents an opportunity for reform. We then draw on international scholarship and regulatory developments to make four high-level arguments. First, Australia should implement a coherent cross-platform standards scheme to cover news content on TV, on radio, in print and online. Second, digital services and platforms ought to be brought under this scheme in their role as distributors and amplifiers of news, but not as ‘publishers’. Third, this scheme ought to have oversight of algorithms. And fourth, citizens ought to be afforded a greater role in the operation of this scheme, which has significant potential to serve the public interest by improving public discourse.

© 2022 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/ajr_00086_1
2022-06-01
2025-05-13
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ACCC ( 2018), Digital Platforms Inquiry: Preliminary Report, Canberra:: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission;, https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2018-12/apo-nid209641.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. ACCC ( 2019), Digital Platforms Inquiry: Final Report, Canberra:: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission;, https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Digital%20platforms%20inquiry%20-%20final%20report.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. ACMA ( 2020), Attitudes to News Today: Impartiality and Commercial Influence Quantitative Research, Sydney:: Australian Communications and Media Authority;, https://www.acma.gov.au/publications/2020-01/report/australians-and-news-impartiality-and-commercial-influence. Accessed 27 February 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Akpabio, E., and Mosanako, S.. ( 2018;), ‘ Failure of media self-regulation? Documenting stakeholders’ attitude to the Botswana Media Complaints/Appeals Committees. ’, Open Journal of Social Sciences, 6:2, pp. 144–57.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom ( 2019), Press Freedom in Australia: White Paper, May, Brisbane:: Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom;, https://www.journalistsfreedom.com/ajf-white-paper-plots-law-reform-pathway-for-press-freedom/. Accessed 2 May 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Australian Government ( 2012), Convergence Review: Final Report, https://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/1339_convergence.pdf. Accessed 27 February 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Babcock, W. A.. (ed.), Media Accountability: Who Will Watch the Watchdog in the Twitter Age?, London:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bayliss-McCulloch, J.. ( 2013;), ‘ Striking a balance: News regulation in the digital age. ’, Communications Law Bulletin, 32:1, pp. 10–13.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Bell, E., and Owen, T.. ( 2017;), ‘ The Platform Press: How Silicon Valley reengineered journalism. ’, 29 March, Columbia Journalism Review, https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/platform-press-how-silicon-valley-reengineered-journalism.php. Accessed 2 May 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Bertrand, C. J.. ( 2000), Media Ethics and Accountability Systems, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction;.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Cathcart, B.. ( 2021;), ‘ The Guardian and Press Reform: A wheel come full circle. ’, The Political Quarterly, 92:1, pp. 48–56.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Centre for Media Transition ( 2020), Media Diversity in Australia – Joint Submission from Centre for Media Transition and Media Pluralism Research Project, Sydney:: UTS;, https://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/2021-02/CMT-MPP%20Submission%20-%20Media%20Diversity%20in%20Australia%2018.12.20_0.pdf. Accessed 27 February 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Chaparro-Domínguez, M.-A.,, Suárez-Villegas, J.-C., and Rodríguez-Martínez, R.. ( 2020;), ‘ Media accountability and journalists: To whom do Spanish professionals feel responsible?. ’, Journalism Practice, 14:7, pp. 812–29.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Cheruiyot, D.. ( 2017;), ‘ Do bloggers who criticize the press ultimately matter? (Re)defining media accountability in the age of citizen participation. ’, Comunicació: Revista de recerca i d’anàlisi, 34:1, pp. 107–21.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Dahl, M., and Klingberg-Jensen, L.. ( 2014;), ‘ Denmark. ’, Media Law International, 17:4, p. 63, http://www.medialawinternational.com/Denmark%20Article.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Debré, E.. ( 2021;), ‘ The independent Facebook Oversight Board has made its first rulings. ’, Slate, 28 January, https://slate.com/technology/2021/01/facebook-oversight-boards-content-moderation-rulings.html. Accessed 27 February 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Diakopoulos, N., and Koliska, M.. ( 2017;), ‘ Algorithmic transparency in the news media. ’, Digital Journalism, 5:7, pp. 809–28.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Donovan, J., and boyd, d.. ( 2021;), ‘ Stop the presses? Moving from strategic silence to strategic amplification in a networked media ecosystem. ’, American Behavioral Scientist, 65:2, pp. 333–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Eberwein, T.,, Fengler, S.,, Lauk, E., and Leppik-Bork, T.. (eds) ( 2011), Mapping Media Accountability – in Europe and beyond, Köln:: Herbert von Halem Verlag;, http://www.halem-verlag.de/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/9783869620381_lese.pdf. Accessed 27 February 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Eberwein, T.,, Fengler, S., and Karmasin, M.. (eds) ( 2017), The European Handbook of Media Accountability, Abingdon:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Eberwein, T., and Porlezza, C.. ( 2016;), ‘ Both sides of the story: Communication ethics in mediatized worlds. ’, Journal of Communication, 66:2, pp. 328–42.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Facebook ( 2020;), ‘ Response to the Australian mandatory news media bargaining code concepts paper. ’, 5 June, https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Facebook.pdf. Accessed 27 February 2022.
  23. Fengler, S.,, Eberwein, T.,, Alsius, S.,, Baisnée, O.,, Bichler, K.,, Dobek-Ostrowska, B.,, Evers, H.,, Glowacki, M.,, Groenhart, H.,, Harro-Loit, H., and Heikkilä, H.. ( 2015;), ‘ How effective is media self-regulation? Results from a comparative survey of European journalists. ’, European Journal of Communication, 30:3, pp. 249–66.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Fernandez, J. M.. ( 2013;), ‘ The Finkelstein Inquiry: Miscarried media regulation moves miss golden reform opportunity. ’, The West Australian Jurist, 4, pp. 23–60.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Flew, T., and Swift, A.. ( 2013;), ‘ Regulating journalists? The Finkelstein Inquiry, the Convergence Review and news media regulation in Australia. ’, Journal of Applied Journalism and Media Studies, 2:1, pp. 181–99.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Fielden, L.. ( 2012), Regulating the Press: A Comparative Study of International Press Councils, Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism;, https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/our-research/regulating-press-comparative-study-international-press-councils. Accessed 2 May 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Finkelstein, R., assisted by Ricketson, M.. ( 2012), Report of the Independent Inquiry into Media and Media Regulation, https://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/1205_finkelstein.pdf. Accessed 27 February 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Frost, C.. ( 2016), Journalism Ethics and Regulation, , 4th ed.., Abingdon:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Gillespie, T.. ( 2018;), ‘ Platforms are not intermediaries. ’, Georgetown Law Technology Review, 2, pp. 198–216.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Giotis, C.,, Wilding, D., and Molitorisz, S.. (forthcoming 2022;), ‘ How Australia’s competition regulator is supporting news, but not quality. ’, in P. Napoli, and R. Lawrence. (eds), News Quality in the Digital Age, New York:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Helberger, N.. ( 2020;), ‘ The political power of platforms: How current attempts to regulate misinformation amplify opinion power. ’, Digital Journalism, 8:6, pp. 842–54.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Helberger, N.,, van Drunen, M.,, Vrijenhoek, S., and Möller, J.. ( 2021;), ‘ Regulation of news recommenders in the Digital Services Act: Empowering David against the Very Large Online Goliath. ’, Internet Policy Review, 26 February, https://policyreview.info/articles/news/regulation-news-recommenders-digital-services-act-empowering-david-against-very-large. Accessed 27 February 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) ( 2021), Pandora Papers, October–December, https://www.icij.org/investigations/pandora-papers/. Accessed 27 April 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Istanbulluoglu, D.. ( 2017;), ‘ Complaint handling on social media: The impact of multiple response times on consumer satisfaction. ’, Computers in Human Behaviour, 74, p. 72.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Jarvis, J.. ( 2014), Geeks Bearing Gifts: Imagining New Futures for News, New York:: CUNY Journalism Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Karlsson, M.,, Clerwall, C., and Nord, L.. ( 2017;), ‘ Do not stand corrected: Transparency and users’ attitudes to inaccurate news and corrections in online journalism. ’, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 94:1, pp. 148–67.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Kenny, R., and Ozcan, K.. ( 2012;), ‘ The ethics examiner and media councils: Improving ombudsmanship and news councils for true citizen journalism. ’, in W. A. Babcock. (ed.), Media Accountability: Who Will Watch the Watchdog in the Twitter Age?, London:: Routledge;, pp. 108–25.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Killeen, M.. ( 2021;), ‘ Media sector eyes opportunity to rebalance relations with online platforms. ’, Euractiv, 25 June, https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/media-sector-eyes-opportunity-to-rebalance-relations-with-online-platforms/. Accessed 2 May 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Lee, K., and Molitorisz, S.. ( 2021;), ‘ The Australian News Media Bargaining Code: Lessons for the UK, EU and beyond. ’, Journal of Media Law, 13:1, pp. 36–53.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Lee, K., and Wilding, D.. ( 2021;), ‘ Towards responsiveness: Consumer and citizen engagement in co-regulatory rule-making in the Australian communications sector. ’, Federal Law Review, 49:2, pp. 272–302.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Lidberg, J., and Hirst, M.. ( 2013;), ‘ In the shadow of phone hacking: Media accountability inquiries in Australia. ’, The Political Economy of Communication, 1:1, pp. 111–21.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Margetts, H.,, Lehdonvirta, V.,, González-Bailón, S.,, Hutchinson, J.,, Bright, J.,, Nash, V., and Sutcliffe, D.. ( 2021;), ‘ The internet and public policy: Future directions. ’, Policy & Internet, 13:2, pp. 162–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Marsden, C.,, Meyer, T., and Brown, I.. ( 2020;), ‘ Platform values and democratic elections: How can the law regulate digital disinformation?. ’, Computer Law & Security Review, 36, p. 105373.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. MEAA ( 2021;), ‘ Journalists’ union gives notice to quit Australian Press Council. ’, Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, 21 April, https://www.meaa.org/mediaroom/journalists-union-gives-notice-to-quit-australian-press-council/. Accessed 27 February 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Molitorisz, S.. ( 2020a), Net Privacy: How We Can Be Free in an Age of Surveillance, Sydney and Montreal:: NewSouth Books and McGill-Queen’s University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Molitorisz, S.. ( 2020b;), ‘ More top-down than peer-to-peer: Talking to Australians about their ideal news source. ’, Media International Australia, 175:1, pp. 109–23.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Mulgan, R.. ( 2000;), ‘ Accountability: An ever-expanding concept?. ’, Public Administration, 78:3, pp. 555–73.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Newman, N.,, Fletcher, R.,, Schulz, A.,, Andi, S., and Nielsen, R. K.. ( 2020), Digital News Report 2020, Oxford:: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism;, https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-06/DNR_2020_FINAL.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Newman, N.,, Fletcher, R.,, Schulz, A.,, Andi, S.,, Robertson, C. T., and Nielsen, R. K.. ( 2021), Digital News Report 2021, Oxford:: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism;, https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2021-06/Digital_News_Report_2021_FINAL.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Niklewicz, K.. ( 2017;), ‘ Weeding out fake news: An approach to social media regulation. ’, European View, 16:2, p. 335.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Painter, C., and Hodges, L.. ( 2010;), ‘ Mocking the news: How The Daily Show with Jon Stewart holds traditional broadcast news accountable. ’, Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 25:4, pp. 257–74.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Parliament of Australia ( 2021;), ‘ Media diversity in Australia: Executive summary. ’, Australian Parliament House, 9 December, https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Environment_and_Communications/Mediadiversity/Report/section?id=committees%2freportsen%2f024602%2f78452. Accessed 27 February 2022.
  53. Park, S.,, Fisher, C.,, McGuinness, K.,, Lee, J. Y., and McCallum, K.. ( 2021), Digital News Report: Australia 2021, Canberra:: News & Media Research Centre, University of Canberra;, https://www.canberra.edu.au/research/faculty-research-centres/nmrc/digital-news-report-australia-2021. Accessed 2 May 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Pearson, M., and Polden, M.. ( 2019), The Journalist’s Guide to Media Law: A Handbook for Communicators in a Digital World, , 6th ed.., Sydney:: Allen & Unwin;.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Pressenævnet Official Website ( 2022), ‘Home page’, https://www.pressenaevnet.dk/. Accessed 2 March 2022.
  56. Pressens Faglige Utvalg Official Website ( 2022), ‘Home page’, https://presse.no/pfu/. Accessed 2 March 2022.
  57. Ricketson, M.. ( 2021;), ‘ Why the MEAA left the Press Council and why that matters. ’, Australian Journalism Review, 43:1, pp. 11–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Ross, A. A.. ( 2017;), ‘ If nobody gives a shit, is it really news?. ’, Digital Journalism, 5:1, pp. 82–99.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Simons, M., and Dickson, G.. ( 2019), Availability of Local News and Information: 2019 State of the Regions Report, Melbourne:: Public Interest Journalism Initiative;, https://piji.com.au/research-and-inquiries/our-research/. Accessed 2 March 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Sunderland, A.. ( 2021;), ‘ Your ABC’s complaints process might impress you. ’, smh.com.au, 14 July, https://www.smh.com.au/national/your-abc-s-complaints-process-might-impress-you-20210713-p5898y.html?btis. Accessed 27 February 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Suzor, N.. ( 2019), Lawless: The Secret Rules That Govern Our Digital Lives, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Tambini, D.. ( 2021;), ‘ Algorithmic pluralism: Media regulation and system resilience in the age of information warfare. ’, in T. Clack, and R. Johnson. (eds), The World Information War: Western Resilience, Campaigning, and Cognitive Effects, Abingdon:: Routledge;, pp. 165–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. White, A.. ( 2015;), ‘ The trust factor: An EJN review of journalism and self-regulation. ’, Ethical Journalism Network, https://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/assets/docs/142/118/79dd78e-837b376.pdf. Accessed 27 February 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Wilding, D.. ( 2021;), ‘ Regulating news and disinformation on digital platforms: Self-regulation or prevarication?. ’, Journal of Telecommunications and the Digital Economy, 9:2, pp. 11–46.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Wilding, D.,, Fray, P.,, Molitorisz, S., and McKewon, E.. ( 2018), The Impact of Digital Platforms on News and Journalistic Content, Sydney:: University of Technology Sydney;.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Wischnowski, B. J.. ( 2011;), ‘ Bloggers with shields: Reconciling the blogosphere’s intrinsic editorial process with traditional concepts of media accountability. ’, Iowa Law Review, 97, p. 327.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Wragg, P.. ( 2020), A Free and Regulated Press: Defending Coercive Independent Press Regulation, London:: Bloomsbury Publishing;.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Wilding, D., and Molitorisz, S.. ( 2022;), ‘ Improving news media oversight: Why Australia needs a cross-platform standards scheme. ’, Australian Journalism Review, 44:1, pp. 19–38, https://doi.org/10.1386/ajr_00086_1
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/ajr_00086_1
Loading
  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): algorithms; codes of practice; digital platforms; news media; news standards schemes; press council

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test