Code 5 – News and Journalistic Content

This Code is from the Community Radio Broadcasting Codes of Practice (2025) and goes into effect on 1 July 2025. For information about the current Codes of Practice visit https://www.cbaa.org.au/community-broadcasting/codes-of-practice-current.

CODE

5.1 In broadcasting news and journalistic content we must:

a) provide access to perspectives not adequately represented by other broadcasting sectors;

b) ensure that:

i. all factual material is presented accurately;

ii. all News Content is presented with due impartiality;

News Content means: the news content in a news bulletin, newsbreak, news update or news flash.

c) represent viewpoints fairly without having misleading emphasis, editing out of context or withholding relevant and available material;

d) where practical, include the voices of those with relevant lived experience;

e) clearly distinguish factual material from analysis, commentary or opinion, comedy, satire, and any other kind of fictional entertainment content;

f) exercise special care when reporting on contentious or controversial matters where facts may be contested and not settled and avoid the amplification of misinformation and disinformation;

Misinformation is verifiably false, misleading, or deceptive information that has the potential to cause serious harm to the community and/or individuals, including disinformation, which is misinformation created and/or broadcast with malicious intent.

g) not present material in a way that is likely to create public panic or cause serious distress to reasonable listeners;

h) provide correction or clarification of significant errors of material fact in a timely manner;

i) ensure our journalists identify themselves and our organisation before proceeding with an interview;

j) avoid or adequately disclose any conflict of interest. Any such conflict must not influence the content of a broadcast.

5.2 A failure to comply with 5.1b)i. will not be a breach of the Code if the station makes a correction in an appropriate manner within 30 days of a complaint being received or notice of a complaint being referred to the ACMA (whichever is later).

OTHER LEGISLATIVE MATTERS

We must keep a record for 6 weeks of programs we broadcast that relate to a political subject or current affairs in the form of news, an address, a statement, a commentary, or a discussion.

GUIDANCE NOTE ON CODE 5

Gaining and maintaining the trust of listeners is critical for community broadcasters. This is especially important where stations broadcast news and journalistic content which their communities need to rely on.

Audience and community trust is hard won and easily lost. These Codes reflect the types of special care to be taken around important and newsworthy issues, to ensure that stations continue to meet community expectations.

GUIDANCE NOTE FOR CODE 5.1 (B)(I) - BROADCASTING NEWS AND JOURNALISTIC CONTENT

Code 5.1(b)(i) requires all factual material in news and journalistic content to be presented accurately. This means that the information broadcast must be thoroughly checked to ensure that it is accurate. It is important for community journalists and all broadcasters who might deliver some form of news and journalistic content to understand this obligation. It is also important for the station to have oversight of any program which includes news and journalistic content. The requirement for accuracy applies not only to dedicated news and journalistic programs but will also apply to programs which cover some news or journalistic content. For instance, a foreign language community program must comply with the accuracy requirement when talking about news from home. The accuracy requirement at 5.1(b)(i) helps to ensure that community radio is a trusted source of information for all the communities we serve.

GUIDANCE NOTE FOR CODE 5.1 (B)(II) - DUE IMPARTIALITY FOR NEWS CONTENT

While the Codes require all factual material to be presented accurately, there is an additional standard for “News Content”: it must be presented with “due impartiality”.

“News content” is defined as above in Code 5(b)(ii), which applies only to the named categories and does not apply to, for example, general interest, current affairs or opinion-based programs.

“Impartiality” generally means providing an objective view of the facts and perspectives in a news story. This may include clearly separating opinions from facts, so that the foundations of the stories covered in News Content can be easily understood by audiences.

“Due” is an important qualification which means that material should be presented in a way that is appropriate to the content and context of the particular broadcast of News Content. Each story needs to be considered in its own circumstances, including the nature of the content, the type of program, its intended audience, how contentious the issues are and the range or diversity of informed perspectives on contentious issues.

While in many cases, it will be appropriate to broadcast a range of perspectives on an issue, “due impartiality” does not mean every view has to be given equal time or every argument or fact has to be represented.

For News Content involving facts that are not contested, the station may apply “due impartiality” to allow greater focus on perspectives that are most relevant or of interest to the intended audience. For example, a First Nations station covering the destruction of a sacred site may choose to focus primarily on the impact of the event on the First Nations community.

Where News Content is highly contentious, “due impartiality” will require the station to take special care to ensure that the news story represents a diversity of relevant or authoritative perspectives. For example, when covering significant, complex or fast-moving geo-political conflicts which affect different parts of the Australian community:

where practicable and appropriate, a range of competing fact-based perspectives may be included in the same program;

otherwise, it may be important for audiences to be presented with those perspectives over time and across a series of broadcasts.

If there is significant authoritative evidence supporting an issue (for example, in a public emergency), the perspectives of respected sources and prevailing consensus should be given greater prominence, weight and time. Due impartiality does not require stations to air questionable facts or marginal or unsubstantiated opinions.

Given the potential for harm when broadcasting contentious material, stations making editorial decisions about what “due impartiality” means on a particular issue should be mindful of impact of what they put to air and the risk of inflaming prejudice towards or abuse of particular communities or their members. See also the guidance for Code 5.1(f).

The ACMA also publishes the outcomes of investigations into Code breaches by broadcasters and these may cover similar concepts. The investigations can be found here: https://www.acma.gov.au/broadcasting-compliance-and-investigations

GUIDANCE NOTE FOR CODE 5.1 (F) - CONTENTIOUS OR CONTROVERSIAL MATTERS

Community broadcasters play an important role fostering harmony and inclusion in their communities. While freedom of expression is an essential element of a healthy democracy and public debate, an equally important element is access to trustworthy information. Australians are increasingly concerned about the spread of unreliable material, in some cases amplified by generative artificial intelligence, and the damage it can do to the Australian community.

Community broadcasters have the ability to counter the spread of misinformation and disinformation by ensuring that they only use trusted information and legitimate sources and carefully check contentious or controversial stories before broadcasting them.

When reporting on contentious or controversial matters, stations should follow the evidence available at that point in time, including principal relevant perspectives. Where possible, they should focus on information provided by highly regarded institutions and sources – for example, authoritative public bodies, universities and research centres, and established fact-checking websites.

It is always preferable to start with the original source for information (e.g. a government media release about a public health emergency) rather than repeating or adding to a third party’s interpretation of what was said.

Code 5.1(f) covers not only reports about public issues, incidents and events, but also requires stations to take care when identifying individuals caught up in controversial events.

For example, in 2021, local Indigenous community radio broadcaster Ngaarda Media broke the story that a national commercial television broadcaster had wrongly identified a man as having abducted a 4-year-old girl in Carnarvon, Western Australia. This misinformation, which was widely disseminated in national media and online, led to the man being harassed and hospitalised. Through local knowledge and community connection, Ngaarda Media were able to correct the record and give a voice to the wrongly accused man. The wrongful identification and subsequent harassment of a young man as a suspect in the 2024 Bondi Junction shopping centre killings is another well-known example based on the spread of disinformation.

The types of material which have the potential to cause “serious harm” may include:

harm to the operation or integrity of an Australian electoral process

harm to public health in Australia

vilification of a group in Australian society distinguished by race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, disability, nationality or national or ethnic origin, or vilification of an individual because of a belief that the individual is a member of such a group

intentionally inflicted physical injury to an individual in Australia

imminent damage to critical infrastructure or disruption of emergency services in Australia

imminent harm to the Australian economy.

GUIDANCE NOTE FOR CODE 5.1 (H) - CORRECTING ERRORS

Community broadcasting listeners rely on stations as a source of important news and journalistic content that directly affects them, so addressing mistakes is critical to maintain their trust. To comply with our Code obligations and potentially avoid escalating a dispute, stations should follow the guidance in the Complaints Toolkit.

It is best for stations to acknowledge and correct or clarify significant errors of material fact as soon as reasonably possible. Doing so helps stations reduce the risk of wasted time, effort and even legal costs if the dispute escalates.

A “significant error of material fact” is one that is relevant and central (rather than trivial or incidental) to the topic being broadcast.

It may be something included in or omitted from the broadcast. It does not include opinion (unless the opinion repeats the erroneous material fact).

To comply with Code 5.1(h):

Station policies should include a process for dealing with significant errors of material fact, with clear responsibilities and actions.

Stations may decide that any or all of the following corrective actions are appropriate, depending on the circumstances:

Corrections are used where a fact is clearly wrong and/or would mislead the audience - e.g local traffic has increased by 50% (when it is 5%) or a significant material has been omitted – e.g saying a local doctor had been charged with assault but omitting that they were later acquitted.

Clarifications are used where content is ambiguous, fails to explain context or could be seen to be misleading e.g. “The Mayor is considering her future after it was revealed that secret recordings were made in her office” could have several meanings: e.g. she illegally made the recordings or they were surveillance tapes revealing misconduct or she was taking responsibility for a management failure.

Removal of content, whether temporary or permanent, may be appropriate for a serious issue, including one which may result in a legal action, or if an apology is warranted.

In a “timely manner” means that once the significant errors of material fact are identified, they should be addressed at the next practical opportunity on the program/platform most likely to reach the original audience.

Whichever corrective action is chosen:

it should be communicated clearly, not hidden;

if it involves harm or offence, it should avoid repeating the original material;

if too complex to deal with on air, it should refer to material on the station’s website; and

if an apology is needed, it should generally be at the same time as the correction/clarification.

Corrections and clarifications should be clear and specific. For example:

On yesterday’s program about local traffic issues, we mentioned that traffic had increased in the last year by 50%. In fact, the correct figure is 5%.

In this morning’s bulletin we reported that Doctor Taylor had been charged with assault. We should have informed listeners that the charges were subsequently dropped. We apologise for the error.

While not required by the Codes, stations may choose to correct insignificant errors (e.g spelling, time, errors involving no harm or
reputational damage), as part of building trust and engagement with their communities, including on the station’s online platforms.

Prevention is always better than cure: to help avoid the above issues, stations should have an editorial process for fact-checking significant stories and discussions before they go to air and ensure anyone involved in putting programs together has had training around Codes compliance and editorial standards. And keep the Complaints Toolkit and Code 10.9 handy!

GUIDANCE NOTE FOR CODE 5.1 (J) - CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Audiences who listen to a station expect to be able to trust what they hear and that it is presented with integrity and independence from outside influence.

A conflict of interest exists where someone’s personal, financial or professional interest interferes with their ability to present news, stories or any other material to their listeners. The conflict can be actual or perceived - that is, reasonable people would likely think you are affected by it even if you don’t think you are.

Examples of a conflict of interest may include:

Financial conflict of interest – for example when a presenter, their partner or a close relative or associate could financially gain from something being broadcast;

Personal conflict of interest – for example where a reporter has a personal relationship with the subject of their story;

Political conflict of interest – for example where a political affiliation can cloud a presenter’s position or be perceived by audiences to influence what they say

Professional conflict of interest – for example where a presenter has a professional relationship with someone appearing on their program.

Avoiding conflicts of interest is particularly important when presenting news and journalistic information as this can undermine audience trust in the program and the station. But the principles can apply across all types of broadcasts.

The good news is that the Codes allow for conflict of interest situations in radio broadcasts, as long as the person “adequately” discloses them to listeners. Once that happens, it’s up to listeners to make up their minds about what was presented and there is no chance of them being misled. As above, this may not be appropriate in a news or journalistic story.

While there is no strict formula for “adequate disclosure”, the common sense approach is to be clear and up front. For example:

I’m delighted to be talking to publican Mardi Gars today about this weekend’s music festival. I sometimes play gigs at Mardi’s pub and appreciate her amazing knowledge of new music.

Hi everyone and today we are talking to the three candidates in our upcoming local government elections. Full disclosure, I was a candidate myself in the last election for the Tea Tree Party which isn’t running this time. Today is all about hearing about what each of our candidates is promising to deliver for this local area.

If you have declared a conflict of interest, you are still obliged to ensure it doesn’t get in the way of you doing your job, so it is important to be conscious of how you present material - for example, the way in which you ask questions and how you allocate time to different sides of an issue that you have an interest in.