The Press Council's appeal committee has ruled in favour of GroundUp, overturning a decision by the ombudsman that the news site has to apologise for its article on hyperbaric oxygen therapy. In its report on the dispute, GroundUp says the “landmark” ruling clarified the obligations of science journalists in South Africa, “with immediate implications for coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic”.
The ruling arose from an article GroundUp published in March 2019, Quack claims about oxygen treatment are dangerous, which was categorised as science, and described how some companies are making unsubstantiated medical claims about hyperbaric oxygen therapy. The article said quack companies offer it as a treatment for cancer, autism and much else, and named a company making such spurious claims.
The company's manager lodged a complaint with the press ombud, saying his company should have been contacted for its view of the science. “He also argued that GroundUp's article was inaccurate, even though it was accepted during the proceedings that we accurately reported the claims and pricing information on his company's website.”
GroundUp also argued that science reporting should be treated differently to news reporting, and so it was unnecessary to seek the views of a company making inaccurate claims. The ombud did not find that the article was inaccurate, but ruled that, under the Press Code, “GroundUp should not have mentioned the company without approaching it for comment”, and ordered them to apologise.
GroundUp appealed, saying there is no provision in the Press Code against singling companies out. The appeals committee ruled that since the ombud had found that this was a science (as opposed to news) article, GroundUp did not need to seek the views of the company. The complaint was dismissed.
[link url="https://www.groundup.org.za/article/landmark-ruling-science-journalists/"]Full Groundup report[/link]