Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PUBLIC AND PRESS

One of the most important questions which the Arbitration Courthas had to decide came before it last week when the Christchurch Journalists' Union sought an award under the Arbitration Act. The actual details of the claims put forward as to wages and hours of work, etc., were of minor interest ancl of little public concern; but there were certain issues involved, including the question of "preference," which were of the widest importance in their bearing, not only on the parties to tho' dispute, but in their probable effect also on the public generally. Indeed the contention put forward by the respondent newspapers really went the length of suggesting that it was the public and the public interest that would suffer most were an award granted by the Court in such terms as were sought, namely, that all journalists below the status of editors and < assistant-editors should be compelled to join the ranks of trades unionism. Mr. F. Pieaxi, who ably conducted the case for the employers and fought strenuously throughout for the freedom of journalists to exercise their own discretion as to whether they become unionists or not, found himself confronted at the outset with what appeared to be an insurmountable obstacle. The Court, guided by precedent, saw no reason' why "preference" should not bo granted to tho

Journalists' Union, just as it had been granted to other trades unions, and, indeed, in face of the agreements arrived at privately in Auckland and Duncdin, between the Journalists' Unions and the employers there, it is difficult to see how the Court, at the close of the case for the Union, could have acted otherwise than it did, in telling Mr. Pirani that it was useless to argue that point. It is a significant fact, however, that after listening to the evidence which Ml:. Pirani persisted in calling on behalf of the newspaper proprietors, the' Court not only modified its views very materially, but, in a memorandum attached to the award itself, expressed the opinion that but for the action of the Auckland and Duncdin employers it might not have given even the modified "preference" clause which it eventuaily granted.

The interest in the case from the point of 'view of the public lies in the probable effect of an award which would compel all journalists below thc_ rank stated to join a trades union. It was submitted in evidence that whereas the editorial opinions of a newspaper were known to be coloured in most cases by the policy of the paper, the news columns were expected to be, and usually were, accurate records of current events. In the past tho reporters engaged 011 the New Zealand Press, while they no doubt had their individual opinions on public questions, had on the whole been very successful in carrying out their duties as unbiased recorders of the facts which came under their observation. If, however, by means of a "preference" clause, all reporters were compelled to become trades unionists, then, inevitably, there would grow up in their ranks, consciously or unconsciously, a partisan sentiment favourable to traded unionism in all its ramifications. This would be not only prejudicial to the' performance of their duties to their papers, but, owing to the bias which must creep into their reports, it would ultimately shake confidence in the press of the country'as a medium of news, lower the standarc! of our newspapers, and have a harmful effect on our national life. Professor James Hight, of Canterbury College, in the course of his evidence, stated the position with clearness and force:

The most distinctive feature of a Journalists' Union, and one that puts it altogether in a class iipart, he said, is the peculiar nature and functions of the product of the journalist's labour. In a certain sense the journalist may be said to be producing for sale truth and opinions, and the character of these products of his determine in large part the actions of everyone in the community, including tho9o of our governments, local and central. If truth be distorted or suppressed, or if opinions be biased in one direction, whether this be the result of conscious or unconscious action, very grave injury is wrought to society. Of course, I am well aware that newspapers are not always accurate and complete in their statements, nor are their opinions always sane and well founded; but we have to consider the balance of good and evil, and carefully inquire whether it is towards improvement in respect of accuracy, comprehensiveness, and honesty, or towards deterioration in these the essential qualities of a good national Press, that any proposed step is going to take us. No one pretends that wo have, or can ever have, an absolutely free Press. Freedom is a relative tcrni. Some "interests" will in any conditions prove stronger than others, but, as things are now, it is possible for every interest to have its own medium of expression. ■ Rome "interests" would lend the public in one direction; others in other directions; but taking the totality of the Press, it reflects with a wonderful approach to, fidelity the varied and mingled interests and opinions, old and new, of the community. Is the satisfaction of any demand of the Journalists' Union likely to endanger these qualities of the Pi ess which are vital to the interests of the people as a whole? I am of opinion that if the douiand for preference is granted, it will be against the public interest. I say this in tho light of a certain knowledge of average human nature, and of what has happened in the past whenever the power of setting up a monopoly in truth and opinions has been given to <an individual or group or institution.

The plea for freedom was urged with such force that, despite the President's interjection at an early stage of the case that there was no use asking for exemption from the "preference" clause sought by the union, the judgment of the Court as finally given excludes sub-editors from its provisions, and the modified "preference" clause, which is included in the award, has attached to it: safeguards which will minimise to a large extent the threatened danger of a monopoly inimical to the public interest. It is a sound principle that the community has a right to obtain its news from an unpolluted source— that no artificial restriction confining selection to the members of any one class or organisation should be placed on the employment of the men who provide the facts and truths upon which the public bases its judgment on current events—for once tho degeneration of the Press is permitted its reputation as the guardian of-the rights of the people is gone and its influence for good has reached vanishing point. At one stage during the hearing of the case at Christehurch last week it looked as though the Court, trammelled by precedent, and tied by the careless action of the Auckland and Dunedin newspaper proprietors, would have no ! option but to bring the Christ-church newspapers also under the complete thraldom of unionism. The weight of evidence was such, however, that the. Court sought and found a satisfactory way out of a difficult situation. The "Union can have little to complain of in the terms of the award; the employers have much to bs thankful for in escaping from the worst of the restrictions sought to be imposed 011 them : and the public can congratulate itself on the fact that a menace to the standing and status of the Press has at least been minimised by tho Court's decision.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19130623.2.11

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1783, 23 June 1913, Page 4

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,271

PUBLIC AND PRESS Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1783, 23 June 1913, Page 4

PUBLIC AND PRESS Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1783, 23 June 1913, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert