Curbs On Reporting Seen As Dangerous

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30127, 10 May 1963, Page 14

Curbs On Reporting Seen As Dangerous

(New Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, May 9.

New Zealand’s Poisons Act prohibited newspapers from naming a poison used in crime, yet the public had free access to books discussing poisons and their effects, the editor of the “Evening Post,” Mr Gordon Freeman, told members of the English Speaking Union today.

The danger of the act was that newspapers could not give a fair and accurate report of a murder case in which poisons were involved, yet inaccurate reporting was under threat of contempt of court.

New Zealand law regarding defamation was much stricter than the law in Britain or the United States, said Mr Freeman

Apart from presenting news and comment, a newspaper’s primary function was defending public interest “What we must all be on guard against is interference with freedom that is not kept within reasonable limits so that the path is not open to totalitarian rule.” The situation behind the iron and bamboo curtains was well known to all, said Mr Freeman. “It is a fallacy to think it can’t happen here.”

The New Zealand press was constantly trying to get improvement in restrictive laws it felt hampered informing the public. In that battle it needed support.

Restricting reporting of coroners’ inquests, for example, could lead to dangerous and unsavoury rumours being spread in a community about causes of death. Inconsistency in being admitted to a Children’s Court could lead to

wrong impressions of trends. If a magistrate in Palmerston North, for instance, granted reporting rights which were withheld in Wellington, an erroneous impression of delinquency in certain areas could result.

Restriction on reporting evidence in divorce cases gave rise to the danger of witnesses being able to commit perjury without fear of challenge.