Informed consent

I was surprised the Australian Press Council upheld a complaint against the Sunday Age for obtaining information from a source without informed consent.

The girl was drunk when she spoke to the newspaper, which is what the story was about. I remember reading it.

The story was on “ladettes” … young women who drink a lot, swear and party hard. Or as Wikipedia describes them: “loud, foul-mouthed, uncultured and unpleasant young women, who like to drink and smoke and who are often sexually promiscuous.”

The reporter went out on the town and spoke to some hard-drinking party girls.

The relative of one girl complained to the press council claiming she was not in a fit condition to give her consent.

I have a problem with this ruling. The girl was in a licensed establishment and was deemed to be fit to continue drinking (ie she wasn’t under the table and she wasn’t thrown out for drunkenness).

She gave her name, age, occupation and suburb to the newspaper. She knew she was speaking to a journalist on the record.

How is a reporter or editor supposed to assess someone’s suitability to be interviewed? Common sense is the only answer.

Someone might claim after a story has been published that they were depressed or on medication. The press council would have to uphold their complaints too, if they’re going to be consistent.

The press council is a toothless tiger which rules against complaints more often than it upholds them. It has an important role however, and I suspect this decision will be fiercely debated in newsrooms and journalism schools.

I wouldn’t stop a reporter from interviewing a person who’s drinking on the basis of this decision, especially if the person’s behavior is relevant to the story.

Here is the full text of the press council’s decision:

“The Australian Press Council has upheld a complaint lodged by a family friend of an 18-year-old woman whose photograph, and comments about drinking and behaving like a “ladette”, were published on the front page of The Sunday Age.

“The complaint revolved around the issue of informed consent. The Press Council believes this is an important issue for publications to consider, particularly when a story or image involves young people and alcohol.

“The young woman was interviewed, and was posed with friends for photographs, while drinking at a Melbourne campus bar. The complainant said the woman was inebriated on the night, and could not have given informed consent for the newspaper to publish her comments and picture. He said the woman’s privacy had been unfairly invaded and the article had portrayed the woman and her friends in an unflattering light.

“The newspaper said the editor discussed with the freelance reporter and photographer the issues of consent and privacy of the young women in the article. They stood by their belief that she had knowingly consented to the interview, and she told the paper her name, age, occupation and home suburb.

“The Council accepted a statement from the young woman, admitting that she has been drinking heavily before she met with the journalists. Given her condition, the woman was not capable of consenting in an informed way to participating in the posed photo session. For that reason, the coverage, despite the journalists’ belief they had informed consent, was unfair to the woman.”