When a member of the public becomes " Newsworthy " the image projected relies entirely on how the media decides to portray them. It all depends on the circumstances and how an individual journalist decides to writeup the story. For most people there is no redress short of gong to court and suing whichever form of media printed the report. It is a very brave soul who takes on the deep pocketed media in a court of law.
Things are very different if you are the richest woman in Australia and possibly one of the richest people in the world. The Nine network decided to produce a two part series which dealt with the family of Gina Rinehart which was called " House of Hancock ". It traced the Hancock fortune from the days when her father - Lang Hancock - discovered iron ore in Australia to the present time when the export of this mineral underpins the Australian economy.
It was not a flattering presentation and it received no input from Mrs Rinehart. When it went to air in February, 2015 is attracted a massive audience and it was widely promoted. Mrs Rinehart took exception to details about her weight, insinuations her father cheated at tennis and even conjecture on the colour of her mothers hair. The series also went into detail about money disagreements between her and the inheritance of her children.
Gina Rinehart sued Channel Nine for injurious falsehood and misleading and deceptive conduct. The parties agreed to an out of court settlement and each party will pay their own costs. The television network has also agreed that the series would not be again shown on air or streaming for public viewing, nor would a version with four minutes of contentious matter removed be described as a " true story ".
Channel Nine also delivered what is described as a " grovelling apology " for the portrayal of mining magnate Gina Rinehart and her family, and this is an outcome that will have wide repercussions throughout the entire television industry. The fact that the series is precluded from any further form of commercial use in delivering a revenue stream represents a significant loss to the production company.
Television drama is costly to produce. Big name actors are paid handsomely to make the series attractive to viewers and the behind the scenes work crews are huge. A successful production can go on earning rewards for years as it becomes sought after material to fill daytime viewing across regional networks and for showing in other countries. That revenue stream has now halted !
It is highly likely that finance for the production of portrayals that might offend public figures will become skittish and both the film and television industries will have problems attracting investors. Gina Rinehart's success in clearing her families name will encourage others and this has introduced a risk factor that was previously thought to be negligible.
The mighty television networks now have reason to listen carefully when ordinary people complain about how they are portrayed !
No comments:
Post a Comment