The ABC Ombudsman reports to the ABC Board and is the head of the Ombudsman’s Office, an investigations team which is separate to and independent of the ABC content making areas.
Background
The Ombudsman’s Office received 31 content complaints about the episode of Four Corners ‘Pain Factory‘ broadcast on 8 April 2024. Many of these complainants also raised issues with the accompanying online article ‘The Price of Pain‘ published the same day.
The Ombudsman assessed these complaints against the following ABC accuracy standards:
2.1 make reasonable efforts to ensure that material facts are accurate and presented in context
2.2 do not present factual content in a way that will materially mislead the audience. In some cases, this may require appropriate labels or other explanatory information.
Ombudsman’s Findings
The Ombudsman’s Investigation Report was posted on the ABC website here yesterday.
The Ombudsman found:
1. Four Corners made reasonable efforts through reliance on expert analysis to ensure material facts were suitably qualified and presented in context.
2. The program and the online article did not breach the accuracy standards 1 or 2.2.
Additionally, the Ombudsman considers that, although not material context in relation to the application of the accuracy standards, the audience would benefit from Four Corners clarifying that there are differences in interpretation and application of the fluoroscopy billing codes which may contribute to some of the discrepancies highlighted.
Statement from Director of News, Justin Stevens
“We note the Ombudsman’s investigation into this complex issue. We stand by the reporting by the team on this important issue which is in the public interest.”
Correspondence from the Ombudsman to the ASA
In separate correspondence to the ASA, received shortly after her report was posted on the ABC website, the Ombudsman made the following points:
- She acknowledged the length of time taken to investigate the complaints but noted the issues raised were complex and disputed
- She was not able to investigate every issue raised but has concentrated on the major concerns with the program material as highlighted in the investigation report
- Her office has not responded to specific complaints about matters raised in the Spinal Surgery Medical Claim Payment Integrity Report [referenced in the Four Corners report and accompanying online article] – as its role is only to consider complaints relating to ABC content
- She has not responded individually to all complainants as she has determined that this would only add to the considerable delay already experienced
- She is grateful for the expert information many complainants have provided and for the additional discussions and meetings both she and her office have had with professional organisations, medical experts and various Government bodies
- She specifically acknowledged that there are differences in the interpretation and application of the MBS billing items disputed and while she has found that it was reasonable for the Four Corners team to have relied on significant expert medical advice, she has also formed a view that the discrepancies in the interpretation and application of these billing items could have contributed to some of the claims highlighted in the program
- Ultimately, however, Four Corners were clear that the findings were not conclusive and that discrepancies identified should be the subject of further investigation.
Comment by the ASA
The ASA stands by its position and representations that the overwhelming number of services performed by anaesthetists are billed appropriately – this point was not made in the program, leading to misrepresentation of the specialty.
Given the role the ASA has in working with the Department of Health and Aged Care to ensure the appropriate understanding of, and education about, anaesthetic billing, advice from the ASA should have been sought to improve the quality of the ABC’s reporting – this was not sought, and we believe brings into question the credibility of the people and agencies in the report.
The ASA remains committed to ensuring billing integrity and transparency of processes for the benefit of patients, the public and the profession.
The ASA wrote to the CEO of Private Healthcare Australia (PHA), Rachel David, in early May asking to review the data it supplied to the ABC and referenced in both reports. Despite following up this request on at least two occasions since, we have not received a response from PHA.
In concluding, we hope that all media agencies ensure in future that they engage with informed individuals and organisations, such as the ASA, to ensure public interest and transparency is better served.