|
|
While the flyer was not the creation of the broadcaster, it was the latter which decided to make some of the content its own. In this it took a risk, particularly when the flyer was, as discussed above, anonymous and Fairchild and Talentvision could find no-one to stand behind it or be answerable for its content. They chose to rely on information that was materially incorrect and that they ought to have known was materially incorrect. They admit to having the decision of the Court of Appeal in hand since October 24, 2005, a full nine months before the broadcasts of July 27, 2006. They had ample time to review it and, if necessary, seek the advice of legal counsel to understand what it meant. Their reliance on its text to support the broadcast of a hostile anonymous document was unfounded and, worse, erroneous in material respects. The news reports were neither accurate nor fair and consequently in breach of Article 1 of the RTNDA Code of Ethics and Clauses 5 and 6 of the CAB Code of Ethics.
|