| Abstrakt: |
A landmark ruling by an Australian court has put news media companies on notice they face potential findings of negligence and subsequent compensation claims if they fail to exercise a reasonable duty of care to journalists who cover traumatic events. Drawing on legal doctrinal methodology, we look at the successful case and compare it to an earlier unsuccessful case at the same newspaper where journalists sought damages from their employer for injury caused by their work. The case before the Victorian County Court in 2019 was the first to recognise the risk of psychological damage on those who report on traumatic events. The court ruled that journalist YZ, who worked at one of Australia's oldest metropolitan daily newspapers, The Age, be awarded A$180,000 for psychological injury suffered while working between 2003 and 2013. YZ had reported on 32 murders and many more cases as a court reporter. She covered what were colloquially called Melbourne's gangland wars, was threatened by one of its notorious figures and found it increasingly difficult to report on events involving the death of children, such as the case of a four-year-old who was murdered by her father by being thrown from a bridge in 2009. The court's ruling - and ratification of the decision at appeal - was in stark contrast to the case from the same newspaper, in 2012, which did not uphold the claim of a news photographer. Apart from the intrinsic importance of the cases, it is relevant for journalism educators who are charged with preparing the next generation of journalists, many of whom will cover traumatic events. Educators and others have been urging cultural change in newsrooms for years but this ruling shows that it may well be now required by law. This paper asks: Can educators find sufficient space in a crowded curriculum to prepare students?. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
