ACMA finding on Campbell case creates Catch 22

In the complex relationship between the rights of the media and individuals, "public interest" is our measure; now an invasion of privacy has been deemed justified based on the public interest it created.

Last year, then NSW transport minister, David Campbell was filmed by Seven News leaving a gay sex club. When Mr Campbell learnt that Seven News planned to show film footage of his departure from a gay sex club, he resigned from the Cabinet and went to the backbenches, from which he is due to retire at the next NSW election.

Two (unknown) parties complained to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) about this apparent breach of Mr Campbell’s privacy. Mr Campbell did not lodge a complaint.

When challenged by ACMA, Seven News raised several defences, including the public interest, the fact that Mr Campbell drove to the club in a taxpayer-funded car; that he portrayed himself as a family man in Christmas cards; and that as a former police officer he could have been open to blackmail.

ACMA dismissed all but one of these defences. The exception was the public interest.

As reported by SMH.com.au

Yet (ACMA) said the ”need for a deeper explanation of the circumstances behind the resignation” provided the public interest defence, so the public could better assess whether Mr Campbell’s performance had been improper or compromised.

The authority chairman, Chris Chapman, said the ruling was not a precedent. ”Broadcasters cannot simply invoke blandly asserted public interest justifications for flagrant privacy breaches,” he said. ”The authority regards invasions of personal privacy as very serious matters.”

Yet the ruling was silent on the hypothetical it raised: that if Mr Campbell had not quit, Seven might have had no defence.

I don’t know about you, but I find this to be as ludicrous as anything ACMA has ever done – and that is saying a lot, because it is not what one would call a quality agency of government.

Why do I say that?

First, Mr Campbell did nothing illegal in going to a sex club.

He also did nothing improper or unethical, since he went to the club in his own time.

Yes, he used a taxpayer funded vehicle, but he was entitled to use that vehicle for private purposes.

He had not made a name for himself as a homophobe, such as Fred Nile has done, for instance, and cannot be accused of hypocrisy, of being two-faced.

Since he had nothing illegal, it is hard to see how someone could have made use of the visit to the club to blackmail Mr Campbell. It is also hard to see how anyone would have known about the visit if Seven News had not broadcast the story to the world.

Since we do not know what Mr Campbell did at the club, we can’t even be sure that he did anything immoral, such as having sex outside marriage. And if he did, that would be a matter for Mr Campbell and his family to deal with and not something with which the tabloids should titillate the prurient Australian public.

This is not the same as the US President engaging in extra-marital sex at the White House and then lying about it. Mr Campbell told no lies to the public about this. In fact, he was remarkably candid and remarkably mature in how he dealt with this matter, despite the damage to his career, reputation and family.

This event is yet more evidence that we are subjecting politicians to an impossible standard of conduct. We want them to represent us, to understand us, to be like us, but we also want them to be perfect, always, in all ways. Please tell me how this could possibly be in the public interest, in our interest?

I submit that it against the public interest to set the bar so high for politicians that it almost dooms them to failure, because eventually we will run out of quality candidates for political posts, noting that the pool of candidates in Australia is already neither broad nor deep.

After all, would you be prepared to be treated as Mr Campbell was treated and then to be told that because you did the right thing by resigning you have lost the last shred of any right to privacy you might still enjoy?

Patrick Callioni is a former senior public servant, with the Queensland and Australian Governments, and is now the Senior Executive Advisor, Domestic and International Markets, with the Sustain Group www.sustaingroup.net.  His books Compliance and Regulation in the Financial Services Industry & Waves of Change: Managing Global Trends in the Financial Services Industry are available at Amazon