UBI: Kassensturz contribution was not appropriate
The UBI upheld a complaint against a segment on the consumer magazine program *Kassensturz* on SRF television. However, it dismissed complaints against the talk show *Club* and a segment on *Temps Présent*.
As part of its public deliberations on Friday, the Independent Complaints Authority for Radio and Television (UBI) discussed the report "Zahnarztpfusch", which was broadcast on the program Kassensturz on 20 May 2014. The question of liability in the case of failed dental operations was discussed using a specific example. The UBI came to the conclusion that the audience was unable to form its own opinion on the liability issues discussed in the program. If serious accusations were made against persons or companies in a broadcast, qualified requirements regarding transparency and compliance with journalistic due diligence obligations would apply.
Essential facts such as the ongoing liability proceedings of the injured party against the dentist who had performed the failed operation and who is no longer working at the Aarau dental clinic were not mentioned in the article. Due to the lack of transparency, the public was unable to distinguish between statements on liability for incorrect treatment in dental clinics in general and liability in the case described. The UBI therefore upheld the corresponding complaint by a dentist from the Aarau dental clinic shown in the report by 6 votes to 3 for violation of the principle of fairness.
Programs on drug policy not objected to
The UBI unanimously rejected two complaints against broadcasts focusing on drug policy. With regard to the SRF television program "Club" on the topic of "Legal weed - cities put pressure", the audience was allowed to form its own opinion based on the facts and views presented in the discussion. It was not necessary to point out that the former Federal Councillor Ruth Dreifuss, who took part in the discussion, had prevented the production of domestic hemp during her time in office, as had been claimed in the complaint.
A program by Temps Présent of RTS about the end of a prohibitive drug policy also did not violate any provisions. The thesis character of the film was clearly recognizable as such due to the transparent design and the audience's prior knowledge. The protection of minors required by broadcasting law was also not violated. An exaggerated comment against the parliament had constituted a deficiency in a minor point in the context of the entire broadcast.
Decisions of the UBI can be appealed to the Federal Supreme Court within 30 days of receiving the written reasons. (SDA)
