Ms Susan McKay:

The Press Council is responsible for having set up the Office of the Press Ombudsman. I relate to it in the sense that I provide its secretariat. My office is the secretariat for the Press Council. The Press Council is led by its chairperson. As most of the business of the Press Council is the Office of the Press Ombudsman, I am the CEO of that office, which consists of me and two staff. It is very small because my primary function is decision-making. The whole rather complex structure of the office was set up in such a way that there would be lines between my office and the Press Council, as well as there being areas in which we would work together. Obviously, my decisions are made independently of the council, but they are subject to appeal to it. As a result, there so clearly there has to be a separation. The organisation was set up to facilitate that difference from a normal company.

Regarding complaints, I would like to do much more outreach to make people more aware of how to make a complaint well. Sometimes people do not understand that. This will be an issue. I was quite well known as a person who stood up for certain things or even championed certain rights. I think there will be people who will expect me to perform that function in this job. Of course, that will not be the function that I will be performing. I will be making sure there are no breaches of the code of principles which the Press Council has established and which the code committee is in charge of. I am satisfied that those are comprehensive. As I mentioned earlier, they cover all the grounds that are covered by the equality authorities here.

Most complaints are about truth and accuracy. What characterises some of the complaints that do not succeed in going anywhere is the fact that people think because they disagree with something in the media, that means they can complain about it. Many people make complaints about things that politicians are quoted as having said, for example, when what the newspaper is probably doing is reflecting what was said, often in a privileged setting. Obviously, things will be said which will cause offence and cause people to be angry, and which will cause people to say that is not true, but it is not the fault of the press that the statement people believe to be not true has been made. Clarifying those kinds of things would stop many complaints that will not be able to proceed. Obviously, we do not want to add to people's frustration. We want to help them to get through it.

The role of the case manager in the Office of the Press Ombudsman is important. My colleague, Bernie Grogan, is the first point of contact for complainants. She sorts out many complaints through a process of conciliation, where she liaises between the complainant and editor. People are often satisfied with some offer that the editor will make to them, such as taking something out, taking an article down, clarifying something or asking if people would like to write an article explaining their point of view.

I would also like to make clearer to people that although they have to demonstrate that they have been personally affected by an article, it is possible for organisations to make a complaint on behalf of those they represent. For instance, a civil society organisation that represents Travellers or women would be able to make a complaint on behalf of those who they represent so it is not just a matter for individual complaints. It is interesting that quite a lot of complaints are made about prejudice. That is really important that we should highlight that function is there.

Distinguishing fact and comment is an area where there are a lot of complaints. As newspapers lean more and more on comment as a way of filling their pages - I do not mean that disparagingly as there are a lot of excellent commentary writers in this country - it is an area of confusion for people because Irish law allows for some pretty strong commentary to be made. People who are offended by that often complain to us without realising that people are allowed to express strong opinions. The problem arises where they are seen to assert opinion as if it was fact. It is very important that people distinguish those two things. Someone cannot make wild claims, for example, about the number of migrants who are coming into this country without stating that it is simply their opinion that is the case and that they do not actually know what the number is. A degree of accuracy is still required in commentaries.

People are quite surprised that the number of complaints that reach decision level is relatively small but it is constantly growing. There seem to be a lot of complaints coming in at the moment. We are getting a lot of complaints related to protests and demonstrations.