BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary  

[This summary does not form part of the decision.]

The Authority has not upheld a complaint under the accuracy standard regarding a 1 News report that ‘thousands have again protested outside the White House against the recent Supreme Court decision to scrap the constitutional right to abortion’. The complaint was that the United States constitution does not include the right to abortion. The Authority found the item was not inaccurate in this respect, as a previous Supreme Court decision (Roe v. Wade) had interpreted the US Constitution as conferring a right to abortion.

Not upheld: Accuracy

The broadcast

[1]  During an item on 1 News on 10 July 2022, a newsreader stated:

Thousands have again protested outside the White House against the recent Supreme Court decision to scrap the constitutional right to an abortion.…More than a dozen states have already banned the procedure, since the decision to overturn the 50 year old Roe v. Wade decision on June the 24th.

The complaint

[2]  Fred Carter complained that the broadcast breached the accuracy standard of the Broadcasting Standards Codebook for the following reason:

News reporter stated that it is a constitutional right to have an abortion in the US, This is a false statement, as nowhere in the constitution does it state that you have the right to have an abortion.

[3]  On referral to the Authority, the complainant also sought to rely on the offensive and disturbing content standard. Pursuant to section 8(1B) of the Broadcasting Act 1989, we are only able to consider his complaint under the standard(s) raised in the original complaint to the broadcaster. The High Court has clarified that in certain circumstances:¹

…it is permissible [for the Authority] to fill gaps… or cross boundaries between Code standards…but only if these things can be done within the wording, reasonably interpreted, of the original complaint, and if a proper consideration of the complaint makes that approach reasonably necessary…

[4]  In our view the accuracy standard is most relevant to the nature of the complaint, and we do not believe proper consideration of the complaint makes it necessary to consider the offensive and disturbing content standard.

The broadcaster’s response

[5]  TVNZ did not uphold Carter’s complaint, and stated it was incorrect:

Roe v. Wade was a decision of the US Supreme Court conferring the constitutional right to abortion. The decision was overturned by the Supreme Court in June 2022, hence the protests that were the subject of the story. In other words, abortion was a constitutional right in the United States prior to being ‘scrapped’ in June 2022.

[6]  TVNZ provided a link to the Wikipedia page for the Roe v. Wade decision, which reads:²

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States conferred the right to have an abortion.

The standard

[7]  The accuracy standard states broadcasters should make reasonable efforts to ensure that news, current affairs and factual programming is accurate in relation to all material points of fact and does not mislead.³ Its purpose is to protect the public from being significantly misinformed.⁴

Our analysis

[8]  We have watched the broadcast and read the correspondence listed in the Appendix.

[9]  As a starting point, we considered the right to freedom of expression. As we may only intervene when the limitation on the right to freedom of expression is reasonable and justified, we weigh the right to freedom of expression against any harm potentially caused by the broadcast.⁵

[10]  We do not consider the broadcast was inaccurate or misleading. The recent US Supreme Court decision Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturned its decision in the Roe v. Wade case, ⁶ which had interpreted the US Constitution as conferring a right to abortion. Until this occurred, US citizens held, at law, a constitutional right to abortion (even though it may not have been specifically stated in the Constitution).

[11]  We note the broadcaster’s response to the complainant adequately addressed the complaint and provided sources in support of its statement.

[12]  Accordingly, we do not uphold the complaint under the accuracy standard.

For the above reasons the Authority does not uphold the complaint.
Signed for and on behalf of the Authority
 

Susie Staley
Chair
19 October 2022    

Appendix

The correspondence listed below was received and considered by the Authority when it determined this complaint:

1  Fred Carter’s formal complaint – 12 July 2022

2  TVNZ’s response to the complaint – 8 August 2022

3  Carter’s referral to the Authority – 9 August 2022

4  TVNZ’s confirmation of no further comments – 12 August 2022

¹ See Attorney General of Samoa v TVWorks Limited, CIV-2011-485-1110 at [62]
² Wikipedia “Roe v. Wade” (accessed 23 August 2022) <wikipedia.org>
³ Standard 6, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁴ Commentary, Standard 6, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 16
⁵ Introduction, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 4
⁶ Jessica Glenza, Martin Pengally, Sam Levin “US Supreme Court overturns abortion rights, upending Roe v. Wade” The Guardian (online ed, 24 June 2022)