Labour, PBS cross swords over BA ruling

The Labour Party and the state broadcaster yesterday crossed swords again over the Broadcasting Authority's conclusions of a complaint filed against the PBS newsroom.

Following a complaint filed by Labour (PL) over two items aired last week, the Broadcasting Authority yesterday ruled that PBS was guilty of repeating an item but did not go into the merits of whether the reporting was correct.

On February 15, the station carried a news item in the six o'clock bulletin as a follow-up to an article that appeared in The Sunday Times. The report said that the PL had proposed, among other things, that political parties should receive an annual contribution from the state of €5 for each vote obtained at the last election.

According to the PL, the figures quoted by the PBS in the news item were wrong. However, the PBS head of news, Natalino Fenech, pointed out last week that the station had issued a correction after receiving a call from PL news coordinator Kurt Farrugia. It resulted, he said, that Mr Farrugia's so-called correction was incorrect and, consequently, PBS had to carry another correction.

The following day, the station carried a similar item and included a vox pop to clarify the issue.

But on February 18, the PL filed a complaint with PBS about the second item. Dr Fenech wrote back denying any breach of the Broadcasting Act.

The PL then filed a complaint with the Broadcasting Authority.

The PL yesterday said the authority upheld its complaint and found the PBS newsroom guilty of breaching the established standards for news bulletins against the PL's interests.

According to the PL, PBS had reported, as a fact, a proposal made by the party before a parliamentary committee chaired by the Speaker of the House, Louis Galea. PBS aired a comment by Dr Galea saying that no proposals were presented to the committee.

When contacted by The Times, the chairman of the station's editorial board, Joe Pirotta, pointed out that the authority did not go into the merits of whether the reporting was correct or not. The authority could not, and did not, reach a conclusion on whether the reported facts were correct or not, he said.

The authority, however, ruled against the fact that the station had repeated the item, pointing out that if the station wanted to clarify the two corrections then it should have limited itself to the clarification.

The PL never complained that the news bulletin was a follow-up and the authority decided on something PBS was never accused of, Prof. Pirotta said.

He said it was very strange that other newsrooms constantly repeated the same news bulletins on a daily basis and, yet, were not found guilty of repetition by the authority. "We don't wish to say that there are two weights and two measures against PBS," he said.