Press Council approves complaint of unfair research
Der Presserat hat eine Beschwerde gegen die Zeitung Sonntagsblick wegen unlauterer Recherche gut geheissen. Im Fall des Artikels «Sozial-Irrsinn! Familie kostet 60'000 Franken im Monat» habe die Journalistin die betroffene Familie über das Ziel der Recherche getäuscht.
With the Article Sonntagsblick violated paragraph 4 of the "Declaration of the Duties and Rights of Journalists," the Swiss Press Council wrote in a statement Wednesday. The paragraph requires journalists not to use unfair methods when obtaining information, sounds, images and documents. In the article, published on Sept. 14, 2014, Sonntagsblick reported on an Eritrean family whose care costs their municipality of residence in the canton of Zurich 60,000 francs a month. The social work company SolidHelp filed a complaint against the article with the Press Council.
Used" as an informant
SolidHelp based the complaint on the fact that the journalist had "used" the mother of the Eritrean family mentioned in the article as an informant. Four of the seven children have been placed in a home. The journalist had pretended to help the mother get the children back. However, the article itself did not in any way address the issue of the possibly unjustified out-of-home placement of the children. As evidence, the complainant cited three text messages sent by the journalist to the mother. In them, the author of the article identifies herself as a journalist and tells the woman that she can help her get the children back.
Name the goal of the search
The Press Council derives from the fairness requirement of the "Declaration of the Duties and Rights of Journalists" and the associated Guideline 4.1 that the journalist should clearly state the goal of the research - even if not its details. In particular, "fishing expeditions" are frowned upon, by means of which attempts are made to obtain explosive information under the pretext of a different research purpose. In a statement, Sonntagsblick wrote that SolidHelp was the company that looked after the family, but did not mention this in the complaint. The Press Council states that the newspaper does not refer to the SMS communication in the statement and does not claim that there are other SMS by means of which the mother would have been informed about the purpose of the research. For the press council it is obvious that the author wanted to get information about the care services for the family via the question of the external placement of four children. This blatantly contradicts the professional ethics of fairness and violates the principle of fairness, the statement said. (SDA)
