While the ABC thinks nothing of calling climate deniers paedophiles the Australian Press Council has other views.
… it has concluded that the report of the anonymous remarks concerning paedophilia, a very serious and odious crime, were highly offensive. The Council’s principles relate, of course, to whether something is acceptable journalistic practice, not whether it is unlawful. They are breached where, as in this case, the level of offensiveness is so high that it outweighs the very strong public interest in freedom of speech.
But I wonder is the difference in approach is because the ABC referred to deniers as paedophiles and the article the Press Council was criticising was referring to (some) alarmists as paedophiles?
It was fully justifiable in the public interest to convey the intensity of feeling by some opponents of wind farms but that goal did not require quoting the reference to paedophilia.
The point remains, however. The Australian Press Council thinks that referring to people as paedophiles is highly offensive – the ABC does not.