Investigation Report No. 2883File No. ACMA2012/1292

Licensee WIN Television NSW Pty Ltd

Station WIN Wollongong

Type of Service Commercial television

Name of Program WIN News

Date of Broadcast 16 August 2012

Relevant Code Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2010Clauses 4.3.1, 4.3.2, and 4.3.11.

Date Finalised 22 April 2013

Decision Breach of clause 4.3.1 (present factual material accurately) of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2010.

No breach of clause 4.3.2 (create public panic) of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2010.

Breach of clause 4.3.11 (correction of significant errors of fact) of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2010.

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12

The complaintThe Australian Communications and Media Authority (the ACMA) received three complaints concerning a news item broadcast on WIN News Illawarra on 16 August 2012. The news item was a report about an outbreak of measles in south-west Sydney and included an interview with a general practitioner and Ms Meryl Dorey, President of the Australian Vaccination Network (the AVN).

The complaints raised concerns about the accuracy of the broadcast. These concerns have been investigated in relation to clauses 4.3.1 and 4.3.11 of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2010 (the Code) and are the subject of specific commentary later in this investigation report. The ACMA has also looked at whether the broadcast, as a whole, created public panic in breach of clause 4.3.2 of the Code.

The programThe news item, which ran for 1 minute and 30 seconds, was introduced by the presenter as follows:

PRESENTERIllawarra parents are being urged to ensure their child is immunised against measles following an outbreak in south-western Sydney. However, a choice group claims the medical community is creating a fear campaign and warns the jab can have serious effects.

A transcript of the news item is at Attachment A.

AssessmentThis investigation is based on submissions from the complainant and the licensee and a copy of the broadcast provided to the ACMA by the licensee. Other sources used have been identified where relevant.

‘Ordinary reasonable’ viewerIn assessing content against the Code, the ACMA considers the meaning conveyed by the relevant material. This is assessed according to the understanding of an ‘ordinary reasonable viewer’.

Australian courts have considered an ordinary, reasonable reader (or listener or 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 affairs1.

The ACMA asks what the ‘ordinary reasonable viewer’ would have understood this program to have conveyed. 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 the material has breached the Code.

1 Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited v Marsden (1998) 43 NSWLR 158 at 164–167.

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 2

Issue 1: Accuracy

Relevant Code clause 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.

The considerations which the ACMA generally applies in assessing whether particular broadcast material is factual in character are set out at Attachment B.

The complainants’ concerns in relation to the accuracy of the program relate to three specific issues and one general one:

1. Use of the term ‘choice group’ to describe the AVN and use of the plural ‘choice groups’;

2. Reference to ‘heated discussion over possible links between vaccinations and autism’;

3. The statement that ‘All vaccinations, in the medical literature, have been linked with the possibility of causing autism; and

4. In addition to these specific statements, the complainants raised a general concern about the accuracy of the overall presentation of a key issue in the program being, the safety of immunisation.

These matters have been assessed separately below.

1. Description of the Australian Vaccination Network as a ‘choice group’

Broadcast materialPRESENTERIllawarra parents are being urged to ensure their child is immunised against measles following an outbreak in south-western Sydney. However, a choice group [ACMA’s emphasis] claims the medical community is creating a fear campaign and warns the jab can have serious effects.

[…]

REPORTERChoice groups [ACMA’s emphasis] are calling for greater research into the measles vaccine. [Reporter’s name], WIN News.

Complainant’s submissionsIn a letter to the licensee dated 10 September 2012, Complainant 1 submitted:

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 3

Your use of the expression “choice groups” is somewhat strange, with its resonance of the ethical consumer organisation Choice. Ms Dorey is not in favour of choice, being totally opposed to all vaccinations against all diseases. I am not aware of any other ‘choice groups’ in reference to vaccination in Australia apart from Ms Dorey and her small group of followers. Vaccination of children against infectious diseases is of course not compulsory in Australia.

[…]

It is disingenuous to describe Ms Dorey and her followers in the deceptively named anti-vaccination lobby group “Australian Vaccination Network” as a “choice group” […] the AVN in fact offers no choice because it consistently presents a view opposed to proven medical treatment while promoting and marketing ineffective and in many cases dangerous or banned “alternatives” …

Licensee’s submissions In response to the ACMA’s request for comments, the licensee submitted that:

The use of the expression ‘choice groups’ intended to inform viewers that families were making a choice to immunize [sic] or not, the subject was immunization [sic] not consumer buying as the complainant [name] has expressed. ...

The word choice has the meaning the act or an instance of choosing or selecting, the opportunity or power of selecting. Australia is a democratic society and its citizens have a right to choose the AVN or “Stop the AVN” or the Australian Medical information [sic]. We are of the view that the ordinary viewer of the WIN Illawarra news could have understood the term.

In relation to the complainant not being aware of any other group, we do not accept this statement. The group Stop the AVN is a group opposing the AVN, the public have the right to choose which of these two group’s [sic] philosophies they agree [with].

FindingThe licensee did not breach clause 4.3.1 in relation to the use of the term “choice group” or the plural “choice groups”.

ReasonsThe ACMA characterises the statements as factual material for the purposes of clause 4.3.1. The ACMA also considers that the material was presented accurately and would be compliant with the Code. In coming to this conclusion, the ACMA considered:

In Australia vaccination is not compulsory2. Parents choose whether or not to vaccinate their children.

The reference was clearly not a reference to the consumer organisation Choice. In this context, as set out in the opening statement made by the presenter, the reference to the “choice group” was an attempt to distinguish between those who agree with

2 The Australian Immunisation Handbook, 9th Edition, sourced from http://www.immunise.health.gov.au/ accessed by the ACMA 6 December 2012.

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 4

vaccination (the general community3 and the medical community) and those who do not.

The AVN, on its website, describes itself as a choice group and promotes people making an “informed vaccination choice”4. While it is accepted that AVN generally encourages the ‘choice’ not to vaccinate, it is nonetheless a choice and in this context describing AVN as a choice group would not have been misleading to the ordinary reasonable viewer.

In relation to the use of the plural “choice groups”, the complainant’s submission that they are not aware of any other group in Australia opposing vaccination is noted. However, there is no suggestion in the broadcast that the ‘choice groups’ referred to in the broadcast are confined geographically to Australia. There is a number of groups both in Australia and from around the world who oppose vaccinations and would like to see further research done on this issue5.

2. Reference to “heated discussion” over links between vaccination and autism

Broadcast material

REPORTER – voice-overIn New South Wales, just over 6% of two-year-olds and 9% of five-year-olds have not received the recommended vaccination. There remains heated discussion over possible links between the jab and the development of autism. [ACMA’s emphasis].

Complainants’ submissionsComplainant 1

In a complaint to the licensee dated 18 August 2012, Complainant 1 stated:

There has been plenty of research and the discussion is now over.

Complainant 2

In a letter to the licensee dated 19 August 2012, Complainant 2 stated:

This claim is inaccurate. The only ‘heated discussion’ surrounding the vaccine/autism link comes from anti-vaccination organisations such as that which Ms Dorey fronts. As far as the medical science is concerned, the link no longer exists. Several studies have concluded that there is no causal association between vaccines and autism6.

3 The ACMA notes that vaccination in Australia is voluntary and that the Australian Childhood Immunisation Register statistics show that over 90 per cent of Australian children are fully vaccinated. Source: http://www.medicareaustralia.gov.au/provider/patients/acir/statistics.jsp.

4 www.avn.org.au 5 For example, Vaccination Information Service (www.vaccination.inoz.com); Immunisation

Awareness Society (www.ias.org.nz); National Vaccine Information Center (www.nvic.org); ARNICA UK Parents’ Support Network (www.arnica.org.uk)

6 Complainant 2 provided the following link in support of this submission: http://www.scribd.com/doc/77522549/American-Academy-of-Pediatrics-List-of-41-Studies-Vaccines-Not-Linked-to-Autism

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 5

Complainant 3

In a letter to the licensee dated 20 August 2012, Complainant 3 stated:

The only “heated discussion” is in the minds of anti-vaccination cranks such as Ms Dorey.

In referring the complaint to the ACMA, Complainant 3 stated:

WIN has used the discredited excuse “a divide exists within the community in relation to immunising children.” This is a red herring and untrue. The only divide is between science and a couple of cranks.

Licensee’s submissions In response to the complainants, the licensee stated:

The story presented was accurate, fair and balanced and presented the views of the medical practitioners and of the choice groups. The story stated “there remains heated discussion over possible links between the development of autism” a factual statement based on viewer feedback of the story from those supporting immunisation and those who do not.

In response to the ACMA’s request for comments, the licensee submitted that:

The complainants’ assertion that the “discussion is now over” unfortunately is not true.

Finding The licensee did not breach clause 4.3.1 in relation to the statement:

There remains heated discussion over possible links between the jab and the development of autism.

ReasonsThe ACMA characterises the statement as factual material for the purposes of clause 4.3.1. The complainants submit that the statement is untrue because, after much research and discussion, the scientific community is overwhelmingly of the view that there is no link between autism and the measles vaccination. While the complainants’ submissions in this regard are noted, the ACMA considers that the ordinary reasonable viewer would not have taken the statement to mean that the ‘heated discussion’ is confined to discussion with or within the medical/scientific community.

In the context of this particular broadcast, the statement was broadcast accurately, capturing the divide between the medical community and those in the non-medical community (however few) who oppose vaccination. The introduction to the broadcast clearly set out that there is a conflict between the views of a community group and the views of the medical community: “However a choice group claims the medical community is creating a fear campaign…”

Further the medical/scientific position is stated by the general practitioner interviewed who states, “As doctors we recommend that everyone’s immunised.”

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 6

The licensee provided the ACMA with a number of articles7 and referred to the public reaction to the broadcast expressed in postings on the WIN News website and in a story on ABC’s Media Watch8, as evidence of the ‘heated discussion’. It is noted that some of the articles and the public reaction post-date the broadcast and as such are not relevant to the circumstances of the preparation of the broadcast. However, these items are considered indicative of an ongoing controversy.

The ACMA accepts that vaccination is a matter over which there has been strong opposition from some people outside the medical community, notwithstanding the overwhelming weight of medical/scientific evidence that supports the pro-vaccination viewpoint.

Accordingly, the licensee has not breached clause 4.3.1 of the Code in relation to the broadcast of the relevant statement.

3. All vaccinations have been linked to autism

Broadcast material

MERYL DOREYAll vaccinations, in the medical literature, have been linked with the possibility of causing autism, not just the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine.

Complainants’ submissionsComplainant 1

In a letter to the licensee dated 18 August 2012, Complainant 1 submitted that:

They allowed Ms Dorey to make false statements casting doubt on the safety of vaccination during the news broadcast … it has been proven that there is no link between any vaccination and autism.

To the ACMA, Complainant 1 submitted:

[…] anti-vaccination activist, Ms Meryl Dorey made untrue and uncorrected statements implying that all vaccines cause autism …

Complainant 2

In a letter to the licensee dated 19 August 2012, Complainant 2 submitted:

Ms Dorey was then allowed to make unqualified, incorrect and misleading claims surrounding all immunisations: “All vaccinations in the medical literature have been linked with the possibility of causing autism, and not just the Measles Mumps Rubella

7 Articles provided by the licensee included: reports from ABC News and The Sydney Morning Herald (dated 24 and 25 February 2012

respectively) about the NSW Supreme Court ruling that the Health Care Complaints Commission acted outside of its jurisdiction when it issued a public warning against the Australian Vaccination Network (refer http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-24/anti-vaccine-group-wins-court-victory/3850682 and http://www.smh.com.au/national/health/critics-sound-alarm-bells-after-court-rules-in-favour-of-antivaccination-group-20120224-1ttoq.html);

an article from the Australian Women’s Weekly entitled ‘The Autism Generation’, September 2012; and

8 The broadcast featured in an episode of ABC’s Media Watch broadcast on 1 October 2012, refer www.abc.net.au/mediawatch

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 7

vaccine”. No attempt was made to rebut these claims, nor was the audience made aware that the claims are wrong and not taken seriously any more.

Ms Dorey’s claims are incorrect. Ms Dorey’s claims are misleading. Ms Dorey’s claims are based solely on anti-vaccination misinformation which has been thoroughly investigated and found to be wrong …

Complainant 3

In a letter to the licensee dated 20 August 2012, Complainant 3 submitted:

The alleged link between vaccines and autism has been thoroughly investigated by scientists in studies involving hundreds of thousands of children worldwide and totally discredited9

To the ACMA, the complainant submitted:

There is no link between any vaccine and autism […] That claim has been well and truly demolished by research involving hundreds of thousands of children10. The researcher who postulated that link has been struck off the British Medical Register11, his paper has been redacted from the Journal who published it (the Lancet)12, and his research has been shown to be fraudulent.

Licensee’s submissions In response to the ACMA’s request for comments, the licensee made no submissions with respect to the accuracy of this statement.

FindingThe licensee breached clause 4.3.1 in relation to the statement made by Ms Dorey that:

All vaccinations, in the medical literature, have been linked with the possibility of causing autism, not just the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine.

ReasonsThe ACMA characterises the statement made by Ms Dorey as factual material for the purposes of clause 4.3.1. The ACMA considers that the identity of the person making the statement does not in and of itself determine whether the statement is factual material or opinion.

While the statement was made by an interviewee in the report, there was no surrounding context to suggest that the statement was Ms Dorey’s opinion, or that the statement was not factual. Ms Dorey’s appearance in the report was marked with a screen image of a telephone and the text “Vaccine Debate, voice of Meryl Dorey – President Australian Vaccination Network”. There was nothing to suggest that she was unqualified to speak about the issue or that her statements should be taken by viewers as mere opinion. Moreover, Ms Dorey’s tone when referring to ‘the medical literature’ would likely have suggested to the ordinary reasonable viewer that she was in a position to speak authoritatively on matters of medical science.

9 In support of this submission, Complainant 3 provided the following link http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Vaccines/MMR/MMR.html

10 http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/Austism/Index .html 11 http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/may/24/andrew-wakefield-struck-off-gmc?INTCMP=SRCH 12 http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2897%2911096-0/abstract

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 8

The ACMA was provided with a wealth of material in relation to the ‘causal link’ issue.

One notable study published in the Lancet in 199813 (the Wakefield study) speculated on a link between the Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine (MMR vaccine) and autism. The licensee also provided a range of material including newspaper and magazine articles, regarding the community debate about links between vaccination and autism.

However, information provided by the complainants suggests that more recent medical literature rejects the Wakefield study and the link postulated. Included in the material provided by the complainants was a published overview14 of studies that look at some forty relevant studies published in various peer-reviewed medical journals none of which concludes a link between MMR vaccinations and the development of autism.

In any event, no current medical or other literature was been put before the ACMA suggesting a causal link between autism and ‘all vaccinations’. Accordingly, the ACMA finds that the licensee has breached clause 4.3.1 in relation to the broadcast of the statement: “All vaccinations, in the medical literature, have been linked with the possibility of causing autism, not just the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine.”

4. General concerns about the factual accuracy in the presentation of a key issue in the program

Broadcast content/nature of the complaintIn addition to the specific statements discussed above, as already noted the complainants also raised concerns about the accuracy of the overall presentation of a key issue in the program, being the safety of immunisation. The complainants are concerned that the program portrayed what they describe as ‘false balance’ by elevating Ms Dorey’s comments in such a way that the ordinary reasonable viewer would have been misled as to the true position on the safety of immunisation.

‘False balance’ is not an issue explicitly dealt with in the Code. The licensee’s submission that the ‘balance’ in the program was one of its virtues perhaps suggests that the construction of the program was conceived in terms of its obligation under Code clause 4.4 to present news fairly and impartially. However, the complainants did not identify any matters pertaining to clause 4.4 and the ACMA has not investigated any complaint under that provision. In that regard, for abundant clarity, the ACMA notes that, in the context of a news report:

warning viewers about an outbreak of measles in the region; and

reporting medical advice to ensure that vaccinations are up to date,

nothing in the Code obliged the licensee to include an anti-vaccination position to ‘balance’ the advice of the medical community.

Where an attempt by a licensee to provide ‘balance’ in news programs, of the kind flagged by the complaints, in fact results in it being likely that an ordinary reasonable viewer would be misled about a material factual issue, then the ACMA considers that Code clause 4.3.1 may be relevant. 13 A J Wakefield et al, “Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive

developmental disorder in children”, The Lancet, Vol 351, February 28, 1998.14 American Academy of Pediatrics, “Vaccine studies: Examine the evidence”, updated November

2010, accessed by the ACMA from www.aap.org on 8 January 2013.

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 9

Complainant’s submissionsIn a letter to the licensee dated 19 August 2012 Complainant 2 submitted :

WIN TV breached the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice by allowing Ms Dorey, an unqualified, untrained, anti-vaccination campaigner, to speak as an authority on immunisation. Viewers were not presented with an accurate account of immunisation research. Viewers were left dangling with the thought that vaccines may cause autism.

To the ACMA, Complainant 2 further submitted :

WIN TV allowed Ms Dorey to again raise the debunked theory that autism is caused by immunisation, and this was indeed introduced by the reporter. No rebuttal was offered for viewers to gauge that this is not a link which is supported by the global health community. In a recent ruling in the United Kingdom, the Advertising Standards Authority ruled that it was a breach of the code to continue to assert that the vaccine/autism link exists.

Licensee’s submissionIn response to the complainants, the licensee made the following submission:

The story presented-was accurate, fair and balanced and presented the views of the medical practitioners and of the choice groups. The story stated "There remains heated discussion over possible links between the development of Autism" [sic].

Complainants’ further submissionsIn response, the complainants took particular issue with the licensee’s assertion that the program was ‘balanced’ in turn claiming that the appearance of balance in the program was something they describe as ‘false balance’. The following typifies the complainants’ submissions to the licensee on this point:

Complainant 1:

I dispute the remainder of your [WIN] defence that the news report was “balanced” by presenting the views of Ms Dorey. It is false balance to include untrue statements from an individual with no expertise, particularly without pointing out to viewers her biased position ...

Complainant 2:

WIN appears to believe that the opinion of anti-vaccination campaigners is equivalent to that of public health experts, and that it is appropriate to include the opinion of unqualified, unreliable anti-vaccinationists in the midst of a public health alert where the importance of immunisation is being promoted.

Complainant 3:

I understand that some journalists are wedded to the concept of ‘balance’. In some areas this is appropriate, but when it comes to the established science as in the case of vaccination, this is so inappropriate that it is irresponsible. There is no ‘debate’ on vaccines. There is accepted public health policy and science-based medicine, a vast repository of facts about the efficacy of vaccination, including the very rare side effects.

Then there is ‘the other side’ concerned with pseudoscience, conspiracy theories, misinformation, fear-mongering, and the promotion … of so called ‘alternative medicine’.

To allow a comment to air under the guise of presenting ‘the other side’ is grossly negligent …

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 10

FindingThe licensee breached clause 4.3.1 in that it failed to present factual information accurately and to represent viewpoints fairly about the the safety of immunisation.

ReasonsThe ACMA considers that the program, as a whole, misled the audience by conveying a higher level of controversy and uncertainty about the dangers of immunisation than was justified by the facts.

In reaching this conclusion, the ACMA notes:

The opening statement that framed the story introduced the idea that there was a controversy about the medical advice that children should be vaccinated:

“However, a choice croup claims the medical community is creating a fear campaign and warns the jab can have serious effects”

Ms Dorey’s views, as presented in that opening statement, were put in strong and emotive terms which may have had the effect of predisposing an ordinary reasonable viewer against the medical advice.

Ms Dorey’s assertion in the broadcast that “All vaccinations, in the medical literature, have been linked with the possibility of causing autism, not just the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine” was inaccurate.15

The predominant perspective offered about the safety of vaccinations was Ms Dorey’s non-orthodox view. While the report does include material in which a doctor is shown recommending immunisation, Ms Dorey is subsequently shown disputing that view, and is given the opportunity to talk at greater length on her views about the medical research and its implications. The only statements presented to the viewer about the state of the actual medical research were those of Ms Dorey, and, in this regard, as noted above, one of her statements, was factually incorrect.

The story leads with Ms Dorey’s concerns and concludes with the statement about choice groups calling for more research. The impact of the sequence and way the story was constructed was likely to leave an ordinary reasonable viewer in doubt as to whether the recommendation by the medical practitioner, that parents have their children vaccinated, was justified.

The program’s use of the term “choice groups”, as well as the statement “There remains heated discussion over possible links between the jab and the development of autism” contributed to an impression that there is a higher level of controversy about the safety of vaccinations than is in fact justified.

No effort was made in the segment to mitigate the impression left with the viewer regarding the safety of vaccinations by contextualising Ms Dorey’s assertions or by offering her credentials to provide a view on this matter.

15 The ACMA was presented with a wealth of information from both the complainants and the licensee on the issue of a purported link between autism and the MMR vaccine. The ACMA is not aware of any current medical or other literature that suggests a causal link between autism and all vaccinations.

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 11

The inclusion of Ms Dorey’s comments raised an unsubstantiated doubt about the safety and value of vaccination against measles.

In this case, the ACMA considers that there was a strong likelihood that the viewer would have been misled about the level of risk of vaccinating children.

For these reasons, the ACMA considers that the licensee failed in its obligation to present factual information accurately and to represent viewpoints fairly in the overall context of the program about the relative danger or safety of immunisation of children with respect to measles.

Issue 2: Public Panic

Relevant Code clause 4.3 In broadcasting news and current affairs programs, licensees:

4.3.2 must not present material in a manner that creates public panic

Complainants’ submissionsComplainant 1

To the licensee, Complainant 1 submitted:

They allowed Ms Dorey to make false statements casting doubt on the safety of vaccination during the news broadcast. This might discourage parents from protecting their children against dangerous infectious diseases … the fraudulent doctor who started the scaremongering has been discredited and deregistered.

To the ACMA, Complainant 1 submitted that the broadcast included:

[…] a scaremongering statement during a serious outbreak of a dangerous vaccine preventable infection in children, which might have caused parents to fail to protect their children by vaccination.

Complainant 3

To the licensee, Complainant 3 submitted:

I take this unusual step of complaining […] this is a most important matter concerning the publication of information by the [licensee] that could have tragic consequences.

[…]

To allow a comment to air under the guise of presenting the other side is grossly negligent … this piece has the potential to persuade confused parents to avoid vaccinating their children, with tragic consequences.

To the ACMA, Complainant 3 submitted:

[…] they [the licensee] went ahead in a grossly irresponsible manner, they misrepresented the science, they misrepresented the “debate” within the community, they misled their audience, they defended the indefensible, and endangered public health.

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 12

Licensee’s submissions In response to the complainants the licensee said:

The story stated that 40 cases of measles had been diagnosed in two and a half months in the Macarthur region, and Dr [Name of GP] from the Shell Cove Family Health Centre stating that the majority of those diagnosed in the recent outbreak were not immunised against the highly contagious disease. The medical profession recommend that everyone is immunised.

The comment from Ms Dorey presented the other side of the story and urged parents not to panic and urged them to become informed about the diseases children are vaccinated against and about the vaccines themselves.

To the ACMA, the licensee submitted:

[…] the facts are that there is a Measles epidemic in Western Sydney, our story highlighted the need for immunisation and further provided the opportunity to the opposing view of immunisation, giving viewers the opportunity to research both points of view if they felt the need.

Finding The licensee did not breach clause 4.3.2 of the Code.

ReasonsThe intention of clause 4.3.2 is to prevent licensees from presenting material that would have the result of causing relatively widespread fear and terror in the general community. Further, the language of clause 4.3.2 is such that for a breach to have occurred, it must be demonstrated that the broadcast actually had the effect of causing panic within the community. The ACMA notes that the comments made by Ms Dorey had the potential to create fear or concern that might lead to people taking actions in respect of their children that do not in accord with the weight of medical evidence. However, in this instance, there is no evidence that the broadcast caused fear and terror in the general community, and did not meet the high threshold of ‘public panic’ envisaged by the Code. The ACMA is not aware of any evidence that suggests that vaccination levels in the licence area have dropped as a result of the broadcast.

In coming to this conclusion, the ACMA notes the context of the broadcast – a report concerning an outbreak of measles in south-west Sydney including advice from doctors for parents to ensure immunisations are up to date – and other statements made in the broadcast including:

GENERAL PRACTITIONER, SHELL COVE FAMILY HEALTH CENTREAs doctors we recommend everyone’s immunised. The risk groups are those under 12 months who haven’t been vaccinated, or anyone who hasn’t actually had their two vaccinations.

MERYL DOREY, PRESIDENT, AUSTRALIAN VACCINATION NETWORK (with title on screen: ‘Vaccine debate’)I don’t think parents should panic but I certainly think that they should become informed about the disease and about other diseases that we vaccinate against, and about the vaccines as well.

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 13

Accordingly, the licensee did not breach clause 4.3.2 in relation to the broadcast.

Issue 3: Correction of significant error of fact

Relevant Code clause 4.3 In broadcasting news and current affairs programs, licensees:

4.3.11 must make reasonable efforts to correct significant errors of fact at the earliest opportunity. A failure to comply with the requirement in clause 4.3.1 to broadcast factual material accurately will not be taken to be a breach of the Code if a correction, which is adequate and appropriate in all the circumstances, is made within 30 days of the licensee receiving a complaint or a complaint being referred to the ACMA (whichever is later).

Complainants’ submissionsComplainant 1

In a letter to the licensee dated 18 August 2012, Complainant 1 submitted that:

They allowed Ms Dorey to make false statements casting doubt on the safety of vaccination during the news broadcast … it has been proven that there is no link between any vaccination and autism. The fraudulent doctor who started the scaremongering has been discredited and deregistered.

[…]

News broadcasters have a duty to their viewers to correct dangerous errors of fact such as this that they have aired in their news broadcast.

To the ACMA, Complainant 1 submitted:

[…] anti-vaccination activist, Ms Meryl Dorey made untrue and uncorrected statements implying that all vaccines cause autism …

Complainant 2

In a letter to the licensee dated 19 August 2012, Complainant 2 submitted:

Ms Dorey was then allowed to make unqualified, incorrect and misleading claims surrounding all immunisations: “All vaccinations in the medical literature have been linked with the possibility of causing autism, and not just the Measles Mumps Rubella vaccine”. No attempt was made to rebut these claims, nor was the audience made aware that the claims are wrong and not taken seriously any more.

Ms Dorey’s claims are incorrect. Ms Dorey’s claims are misleading. Ms Dorey’s claims are based solely on anti-vaccination misinformation which has been thoroughly investigated and found to be wrong …

I request WIN TV offer a retraction and explanation to its viewers.

To the ACMA, Complainant 2 submitted:

It would have been quite easy for WIN TV to address the issues raised, and offer a correction, that Ms Dorey is: not qualified; is an anti-vaccination campaigner; has again provided inaccurate and misleading material presented as fact; has deceived the community into thinking that vaccines might cause autism, where this link no longer exists.

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 14

Complainant 3

In a letter to the licensee dated 20 August 2012, Complainant 3 submitted:

The alleged link between vaccines and autism has been thoroughly investigated by scientists in studies involving hundreds of thousands of children worldwide and totally discredited16

[…]

… I urge WIN TV to make a correction to this News article …

To the ACMA, Complainant 3 submitted:

There is no link between any vaccine and autism […] That claim has been well and truly demolished by research involving hundreds of thousands of children17. The researcher who postulated that link has been struck off the British Medical Register18, his paper has been redacted from the Journal who published it (the Lancet)19, and his research has been shown to be fraudulent.

[…]

All of this has been brought to the attention of WIN by me and others, so WIN has a public duty to issue a correction as soon as possible. They have not.

[…]

WIN should be instructed to issue a public apology and correction in their prime time news.

Licensee’s submissions The licensee has not made any submissions in relation to whether the statement should have been corrected in accordance with clause 4.3.11.

FindingThe licensee breached clause 4.3.11 of the Code.

ReasonsAs stated at issue 1 above, the ACMA has found that the licensee breached clause 4.3.1 by failing to present factual material accurately on the issue of the safety of vaccinations including in relation to the statement: All vaccinations, in the medical literature, have been linked with the possibility of causing autism, not just the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine.

The ACMA considers that these were significant errors of fact and that the licensee could have taken steps to correct them. Clause 4.3.11 both obliges and provides an incentive for licensees to make reasonable efforts to correct significant errors of fact at the earliest opportunity.

The ACMA notes that the material was broadcast on 16 August 2012 and that from 18 to 20 August 2012, the licensee received at least three complaints which referred to the errors. The ACMA further notes that at least two of those complaints included documentation to support the assertion that Ms Dorey’s statement was incorrect.

16 In support of this submission, Complainant 3 provided the following link http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Vaccines/MMR/MMR.html

17 http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/Austism/Index .html 18 http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/may/24/andrew-wakefield-struck-off-gmc?INTCMP=SRCH 19 http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2897%2911096-0/abstract

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 15

The ACMA considers that on receipt of the complaints, the licensee should have undertaken its own assessment as to the accuracy of the broadcast and taken action according to that assessment. The ACMA is not aware of any measures taken by the licensee, in the face of cogent complaints, to test or verify the accuracy of the statement, or the accuracy of the broadcast as a whole, or of any attempts made by the licensee to correct or clarify the broadcast.

In all the circumstances, the licensee has breached clause 4.3.11.

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 16

Attachment ATranscript:

PRESENTERIllawarra parents are being urged to ensure their child is immunised against measles following an outbreak in south-western Sydney. However, a choice group claims the medical community is creating a fear campaign and warns the jab can have serious effects.

REPORTER – voice-overForty cases in two and a half months. The Macarthur region is facing a measles outbreak of worrying proportions. Rates remain low in the Illawarra, but doctors warn the region is at risk.

GENERAL PRACTITIONER, SHELL COVE FAMILY HEALTH CENTREIt is a concern for us, because a lot of people in our region travel up to Campbelltown for work and a lot of people from Campbelltown come down here recreationally. Therefore there’s a big risk that they can transfer the virus to the population.

REPORTER – voice-overThe majority of people diagnosed in the recent outbreak were not immunised against the highly contagious disease. While most will recover within ten days, measles has the potential to lead to pneumonia, conditions resulting in brain damage and hearing loss, and even death.

GENERAL PRACTITIONERAs doctors we recommend everyone’s immunised. The risk groups are those under 12 months who haven’t been vaccinated, or anyone who hasn’t actually had their two vaccinations.

MERYL DOREY, PRESIDENT, AUSTRALIAN VACCINATION NETWORK (with title on screen: ‘Vaccine debate’)I don’t think parents should panic but I certainly think that they should become informed about the disease and about other diseases that we vaccinate against, and about the vaccines as well.

REPORTER – voice-overIn New South Wales, just over 6% of two-year-olds and 9% of five-year-olds have not received the recommended vaccination. There remains heated discussion over possible links between the jab and the development of autism.

MERYL DOREYAll vaccinations, in the medical literature, have been linked with the possibility of causing autism, not just the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine.

REPORTERChoice groups are calling for greater research into the measles vaccine. [Reporter’s name], WIN News.

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 17

Attachment BConsiderations which the ACMA has regard to in assessing whether or not broadcast material is factual in character

The primary consideration is whether, according to the natural and ordinary meaning of the language used and the substantive nature of the message conveyed, the relevant material is presented as a statement of fact or as an expression of opinion. In that regard, the relevant statement must be evaluated in its context , i.e. contextual

indications from the rest of the broadcast (including tenor and tone) are relevant in assessing the meaning conveyed to the ordinary reasonable listener/viewer.

The use of language such as ‘it seems to me’, ‘we consider/think/believe’ tends to indicate that a statement is presented as an opinion. However, a common sense judgment is required as to how the substantive nature of the statement would be understood by the ordinary reasonable listener/viewer, and the form of words introducing the relevant statement is not conclusive.

Inferences of a factual nature made from observed facts are usually still characterised as factual material (subject to context); to qualify as an opinion/viewpoint, an inference reasoned from observed facts would usually have to be presented as an inference of a judgmental or contestable kind.

The identity of the person making the statement would not in and of itself determine whether the statement is factual material or opinion, i.e. it is not possible to conclude that because a statement was made by an interviewee, it was necessarily a statement of opinion rather than factual material.

Statements in the nature of prediction as to future events would nearly always be characterised as statements of opinion.

ACMA Investigation Report 2883 – WIN News broadcast by WIN on 16/8/12 18