Richard Middleton vs. Daily Voice

This ruling is based on the written submissions of Mr Richard Middleton and those of Abigail Oliver, on behalf of the Daily Voice newspaper.

Complaint

Middleton is complaining about a story in Daily Voice of 20 January 2016, headlined No Cape for old Pom boss.

He complains that the use of the word “Pom” in the headline amounts to a racial slur (which, he says, has no place in the new South Africa).

The text

The story said that former England national rugby team coach Stuart Lancaster had been spotted at a Stormers training session in Bellville. A Stormers spokesman reportedly denied that Lancaster was looking for a job with the Cape rugby side.

The newspaper’s response

Oliver replies that the term “Pom” or “Pommie” is defined in dictionaries as a colloquial term for a British person.

She says there is an international precedent in this regard (Bryant vs. Queensland Newspapers Pty Ltd, 2014, in which the complainant sued the company for insulting and offending English people by referring to them as “Poms” or “Pommies”) and submits that the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commissioner (of Australia) accepted that the plaintiff had been offended by those words, but also agreed “that this was not enough” to find for him.

Oliver adds that the newspaper has used the words in question several times when referring to a British person, and denies that any racial harm was ever intended.

My considerations

Having done some research on the matter referred to by Oliver, I am hesitant to be led by this case in the matter at hand – for example, Australian National University Professor Simon Rice says Australia’s legislation is different from racial discrimination laws in other countries, in that it focuses on conduct that causes harm rather than conduct that incites hatred.

I am therefore turning my focus to the ordinary use of the word “Pom” within the South African context, and, of course, to the relevant section of the Press Code (5.1) which states, “…[t]he media shall avoid discriminatory or denigratory references to people’s race…nor shall it refer to people’s status in a prejudicial or pejorative context”.

While I accept that some British people do find the word offensive, I also do not believe that the use of this word is intended to discriminate against or belittle a British person in any way; neither do I think that Middleton’s displeasure at the use of this word is widespread.

I also do not think it is racist, as a British person can be of any colour.

Finding

The complaint is dismissed.

Appeal

Our Complaints Procedures lay down that within seven working days of receipt of this decision, either party may apply for leave to appeal to the Chairperson of the SA Press Appeals Panel, Judge Bernard Ngoepe, fully setting out the grounds of appeal. He can be contacted at [email protected].

Johan Retief

Press Ombudsman