Chatham House rule misrepresentation

I am one of the few freelance writers in Australia who focuses on occupational health and safety (OHS). As a result, my presence is often uncomfortable to those who organise conferences and seminars, even though I operate under the Journalist Code of Ethics. People have had to accept that there is now a media interest in OHS-related events where previously there was very little.  This has caused a couple of problems and challenges.

Chatham House Rule

Recently, one seminar organiser suggested I not attend an event because the “Chatham House Rule” was to be applied.  They said that as I would not be permitted to report on anything said in the seminar, it may not be worth me attending.  This is a corruption of the Chatham House Rule which is best described by Chatham House itself as:

“When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.”

I publish this rule to reassure readers that journalists, even “citizen” ones like myself, will abide by the Chatham House Rule, but it is best if you understand exactly what it means, particularly as I will be ” free to use the information received”.

Most conference or seminar organisers will be content with this rule as, although it is voluntary, it establishes boundaries.

Public Seminars

But Chatham House Rule does not automatically apply to public seminars or events but what makes an event public?  My rule of thumb is that if anyone can purchase a ticket to attend or book a seat, it is a public event.

It is usually unlawful to record as “private” conversation and it would be very hard, in my opinion, to argue that a conference or seminar which is advertised broadly as a public event for which anyone can purchase a ticket includes private conversations from the presenter to the audience.

Speaker Responsibility

Perhaps most importantly, at any event, a Speaker is responsible for what they say.  If you do not want someone to repeat what you have said, don’t say it. Almost everyone has the capability to record audio and so one should assume, in any seminar, that at least one person is recording what you are saying.

A few years ago, a prominent labour lawyer was speaking at a conference.  We knew each other and the lawyer knew I would be reporting on the conference.  The lawyer said something odd and newsworthy on which I could hang an article.  At morning tea, the lawyer asked me not to report what they said even though I was entitled to.  I chose not to, but that situation should not have arisen if the speaker was more responsible.

There are plenty of instances when an audio recording has been made public and resulted in embarrassment or career problems.  In this day and age, ALWAYS assume your presentation is being recorded because it likely is.

The SafetyAtWorkBlog has operated for over a decade and over that time, opportunities to report on some OHS seminars, discussions and debates have declined.  This is partly due to some of these seminars moving on-line but, I like to think, it is also because a freelance writer has exercised the right to attend public events and write about them online.  This level of transparency has created discomfort in some organisations, particularly law firms, some of whom advocate for corporate transparency and provide human rights services.

Establishing a safety library

As this article has pointed out, anyone with a phone or digital recorder has the capacity to record seminars, meetings and discussions.  The legality of recording varies from State to State in Australia but, in my non-lawyer understanding, the laws’ concerns are more about how the recording is used rather than the recording having been taken.

I encourage all conference and seminar delegates to record speaker presentations. If you have paid your admission price, unless recording is specifically prohibited, record each presentation as nowadays, with the departure of conference papers and handbooks, a recording may be the only record of the event you have.  This is particularly useful if you want to create a transcript of the presentation to include in your searchable personal OHS reference library.

Most problems come from the release of audio recordings to the public and without the consent of the speaker.  Linking to the discussion above, if the event is already a public event, everything said is already in the public domain so it cannot be leaked.

Copyright

Copyright may be a consideration in how that recording is used.  If the entire presentation or transcription of the presentation is published (Yes I am including social media here) there may be a breach of copyright.  Any presentation transcripts I have published in the SafetyAtWorkBlog has been with the prior approval of the  organisers at whose event I spoke.

But I record presentations for accuracy of quotes in a similar way that journalists in the past have used shorthand (I have seen one current journalist still use this.  I was so impressed) and these presentations are archived.  But those quotes are just that, quotes, and not entire slabs of a presentation.

It may be useful for event organisers to specify, not the recording of a presentation, but any restrictions on the use of the audio or transcript.

For anyone who publishes online, or elsewhere, I recommend looking at how The Copyright Agency can help.

It is well worth refreshing one’s familiarity with the Chatham House Rule regularly.  The crucial elements, as I see them, are that you are free to use the information on the condition that the identity of the speaker(s) is not revealed.  It is impossible to not know who is speaking but that fact should not be revealed.  A comment should not be linked to a specific person, or the speaker should not be able to be identified from anything that is written or spoken.

Readers of the SafetyAtWorkBlog have benefited from reporting of events already under Chatham House Rule.  Discussions are reported on, but the origin of specific comments has not been identified.

The challenge with reporting on OHS matters, and what sparked this article, is that the Chatham House Rule is being applied contrary to its intention, often by people who should know better, and often in an attempt to restrict the communication of important OHS issues and perspectives.  I believe this is contrary to the continuous improvement of the community’s state of knowledge on OHS matters, but what do I know?

Kevin Jones

This article interprets Australian laws on the electronic recording of conversations.

Categories Blog, conference, ethics, media, OHS, social media, state of knowledge, transparency, Uncategorized

5 thoughts on “Chatham House rule misrepresentation”

  1. Could not agree more with your comments Kevin. If you (as a speaker) don’t want it repeated – don’t say it in the first place.

    I thought (could be wrong) that the general ideas of a safety conference was to pass on your knowledge?

    As a suggestion, if a certain part of the presentation is “questionable” and you are using PowerPoint, you could ask the audience to look away/

  2. We now live in the new age of “information marketing” and spin. The question may be, how will OHS gets its message out in this environment of easily digestible grabs and social media superficiality? Yes, I can still do shorthand, sort of, but there is no need of it if there is nothing to record or the door is locked.

  3. I retain the ability to do a limited form of shorthand, but I think of it as a bit like my generation’s ability to do long division with a pencil – something to impress the children!
    Re Chatham House rule, the one point I’d add is that conference organisers who know there is a reporter in the room must make speakers aware of that, as an ethical courtesy. Not all conference organisers do that, which can lead to dismay.
    But your point is well made – any speaker these days should assume someone is recording their presentation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Concatenate Web Development
© Designed and developed by Concatenate Aust Pty Ltd