BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary

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

The Authority has not upheld complaints that comments made during Early Edition with Kate Hawkesby allegedly downplayed the severity of ex-Tropical Cyclone Gabrielle and associated warnings and safety measures, in breach of several broadcasting standards. The broadcast occurred during the early stages of ex-Tropical Cyclone Gabrielle, and featured Hawkesby and Mike Hosking remarking, among other things, that people ‘love the panic’, had become ‘soft’ and there was no reason for ‘this level of hysteria’. The Authority considered the comments were dismissive of the weather event and insensitive to those already suffering the consequences of Gabrielle. However, the inclusion of interviews with people taking the situation seriously (for example weather experts and a member of Parliament), regular news updates which reported the warnings in place, feedback from listeners directly affected by Gabrielle, and comments by the host that she may be proven wrong, meant that the overall effect of the broadcast would not have promoted seriously antisocial behaviour, or resulted in listeners being misled. The offensive and disturbing content and fairness standards either did not apply or were not breached.

Not Upheld: Promotion of Illegal or Antisocial Behaviour, Accuracy, Offensive and Disturbing Content, Fairness

The broadcast

[1]  During the 13 February 2023 broadcast of Early Edition with Kate Hawkesby from 5-6am, host Kate Hawkesby spent much of the broadcast discussing the developing situation concerning ex-Tropical Cyclone Gabrielle. This broadcast occurred relatively early in the span of days during which Gabrielle impacted Aotearoa New Zealand.¹

[2]  Hawkesby opened the programme by saying:

What Cyclone? I'm just wondering if we've overcooked the cyclone warnings just a wee bit. Did we really need to shut all the schools? I mean, I reserve the right to be wrong. If it comes in like a wrecking ball this afternoon, then you know they were right and maybe it was just a bit slower than we thought. But I don't know. The trains are off, the libraries are shut, the art galleries are shut, many shops are shut. People are being told to work from home. Basically Auckland's shut. It's like a ghost town. And when I drove to work this morning, dry as a bone. Not even raining, just like a regular summer day. People contacted me from Napier saying some schools were shut there. I just wonder what's happened to us as a country that we've become this paranoid and this soft.

[3]  The broadcast included the following key comments from Hawkesby (quotations indicate Hawkesby reading out a listener text or email):

We promote anxiety by living in this fear-fuelled environment. I know there are people who love that and go ohh better to be safe than sorry and ohh it's a bit windy at my place. But you know, give me a break. And the media love it because nothing gets clicks like the weather. We are weather-obsessed in this country. So you know, you're going to get fed a steady diet of the most dramatic pictures and warnings and instructions because that's what gets the clicks and they love it. So it's a self-perpetuating – it's a cycle, you know, and there are people who just lap that up – better hunker down. And there are some areas being hit hard – mainly coastal ones – though, as you'd expect, if you were in an outlying area or on the coast or in a bay or on the beach, they are getting whacked by heavy winds and high swells and things like – places like the Coromandel.

…

Got an email from New Zealand Post: 'I'm a rural contractor, told not to drive until daylight lol. Whatever happened to common sense? I'm out working already.' 'Why is the Harbour Bridge closed?' Many people asking the same question. 'Good morning. Get used to it. The beginning of the climate change lockdowns has started.' It's funny how similar this feels to a lockdown, isn't it? Being told that everything shuts and you can't leave home and you should work from home. It's like, do you think we've all got a bit of PTSD and it's just so triggering. It's like, oh no, not again, not again. 'I live in South Auckland, I work in Mount Wellington. Do I go to work?' I mean, are you serious? Check with your employer what they've told you in terms of whether you are allowed to go to work. But I would have thought if you look out your window, probably looks safe to go to work at this point. 'The whole thing's been blown out of all proportion.’ I have sympathy with that because I feel a wee bit the same way, but I hesitate to just add a but there, it may well be coming in later on this afternoon. If it doesn't, then they have really done their chips on these warnings.

…

It's bloody ridiculous for the Government and councils to be behaving like doomsday preppers… Dry as a bone in the city so far, isn't it.         

…

There's a lot of people texting from all over the place in Auckland saying, I don't have a thing. I don't feel a thing, a few people in Whangārei, though, saying they're getting hit quite hard. A lot of rain, a lot of wind their way and the odd barn going over Northland. So I think that's probably right in terms of coming down the country and they're getting hit quite badly at the moment at the top. Here in Auckland City, so far, nada, absolutely nothing.     

…

'In Whangārei we've had over 200mls in the past 30 hours. Power's been out, over nine metres recorded off Marsden Point. Eye of the storm still hasn't reached Cape Reinga and it's still steady rain and wind' so doing it tough. Feel for you if you’re Northland.

[4]  The broadcast also included the following key excerpts from interviewees:

Coromandel MP Scott Simpson:     Well, I'm in Thames. It's been raining very steadily all night with pretty high winds. So the situation on the eastern seaboard of the peninsula will be worse than it is here in Thames. It's been a night of heavy seas, high winds and heavy rain. And as dawn breaks soon, we'll have a much better idea of what the actual conditions on the ground are at the moment and how people have coped overnight… But look, it's been a pretty tough time for us here on the Coromandel. We're still getting over the remains of Cyclone Hale only a week or so ago when our main arterial roading route was cut out completely. There have been a lot of slips and roading issues, so the ground and substrate is already really wet and sodden and I'm expecting that there will be more slips and some roading outages as well. Electricity has been a problem in several Coromandel communities overnight, cut off by electricity as well. So look, a lot of Coromandel people will have had a very rough night and will be still expecting another rough 24/48 hours yet to come.   

Hawkesby:     Is that right? So you don't think you've seen the worst of it yet? Is that the advice you're getting?

Simpson:        Well, look, I'm not a weather forecaster, but all the indications I can say is that we aren't through this yet… But look, we have got a serious situation here on the Coromandel. People are being urged not to travel today. Schools are closed, as you've said, and we'll just take it hour by hour over the next 24 hours to see how things go… Well, Coromandel people are not unfamiliar with heavy weather events, so most people know what to do, which is to use your common sense. Take precautions. The council was recommending that people should self-evacuate last night if they felt the need to, and those particularly prone to coastal erosion and heavy seas and who are very near to the coast, they will have done that. Sites were set up and as I said, we'll have a better idea of how many people took advantage of those self-evacuation facilities when dawn breaks. But look, we have got a serious situation here on the Coromandel. People are being urged not to travel today. Schools are closed, as you've said, and we'll just take it hour by hour over the next 24 hours to see how things go. But my advice to Coromandel people is just to stay calm, do the sensible thing, look after your neighbours, your animals, people who are nearby. Those sorts of things. Just be cautious, take care and stay safe.    

…

NIWA Meteorologist Chris Brandolino:     The heaviest rain is falling over the Northland, Whangārei since 9 yesterday morning, 161 millimetres of rainfall. Many locations across the Northland region have received anywhere from 100 to 175 millimetres of rain… But you got to remember the heaviest rain is really yet to come for Auckland. We've seen some rain and wind, but today things really start going downhill, especially this afternoon. And we really reached the apex kind of tonight into tomorrow… Yeah, that's right. I mean, the rain will start to get steadier with time. Already seen somewhat steadier rain move into the Auckland area. And as you work into the afternoon hours, as I say, we'll see rain rates really pick up. It is going to rain quite hard for a period of time. And by the time the rain is done falling, at least the most persistent rainfall - say by midday tomorrow or thereabouts - much of the Auckland region will see rainfall amounts anywhere from, gosh, 150 to 250 millimetres of rain. And to put that in perspective, normally we get about 70-75 millimetres of rain for the entire month of February. So we're talking certainly double, triple what we would normally get in the entire month of February, but we're condensing that into about a day or less. So again, the risk for flooding, slips of course, the ground is already wet and it's going to make gardening, you know, it's a lot easier to pull up the weeds when the ground’s wet. And that means the trees and that means the power poles that are on the wet sodden ground, a lot easier for that wind to come on down, for the wind to take them down, I should say. And the wind is going to be really, really ferocious tonight. We'll see wind gusts across much of the Auckland region, anywhere from 100 to 110ks. And tomorrow the West Coast so, the winds go southwest tomorrow morning and much of the day tomorrow. So the west coast of the Auckland region and Northland region, 130k wind gusts. I've been talking to our coastal modellers. We've got to watch out for storm surge in Whangārei Harbour, Kaipara Harbour as well. With high tide, all that water piling up, the water trying to leave the countryside as well from all the rain. So some real concerns for low lying and coastal flooding at high tide for those areas. 

Hawkesby:     Very comprehensive picture. Chris, appreciate you being with us and your expertise. Thanks very much. Chris Brandolino, who is a NIWA meteorologist. ‘Kate, if nothing much comes of the storm, can it be renamed Cyclone Cindy? Overhyped, no delivery.' [laughs] Very good, Marcus.

[5]  The broadcast also included an interview between Hawkesby and Mike Hosking (whose programme followed Early Edition), with the following key excerpts:

Hosking:         I've just been downstairs talking to the rubbish bin man. And he's out on the streets in this morning and he's not remotely bothered by what's happening… Yes, it's raining. Okay. It's just started. But in a way that the rain's falling that you wouldn't even consider to talk about it in any way, shape or form under normal circumstances. So what we've done is whip ourselves into this extraordinary frenzy. I'm listening to your mate, Chris from the MetService. He's now talking about 100K winds as being like a hurricane… Anyone who lives in Wellington, has lived in Wellington, 100Ks is a breezy day. You've still got an outdoor table at the cafe…

Hawkesby:     And I also think we're in a state now where we want to be told what to do all the time, and we just enjoy it as like, oh, oh, hunker down, don't go to school, don't go to work. It's like we almost enjoy the panic.

… 

Hosking:         But we're accepting of it. Why is the library closed today? Yeah. If you don't want to go to the library cause you might get wet getting there, fair enough. But I mean, why are you closing it? Why isn't a train running or buses? Are they being blown off the tracks? There is no reason for this level of hysteria. 

Hawkesby:     We may eat all our words come this afternoon.

Hosking:         It's possible. Anything's possible. From what I gather this morning, is that your Gisbornes, your Coromandels, on the coast. If you're by a beach and there's a storm surge, that I get. The rest of it, I'm yet to be convinced. 

[6]  The broadcast also included multiple news updates that conveyed the current weather situation and warnings, for example:

The upper North Island is set to bear the brunt of ex-Cyclone Gabrielle today. Severe weather warnings and watches are in place for the entire North Island and upper South Island. Red warnings are in effect for Northland, Auckland, the Coromandel Peninsula and the Gisborne district north of Tolaga Bay. Newstalk ZB's Demelza Jackson says at least 23,000 homes across Auckland and Northland have spent the night without power… 

The complaints

[7]  Allan Cobham,² Ian Findlay and Leighton Cox complained that the hosts’ comments breached the Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand. Their key points of complaint under each standard raised can be summarised as follows:

Promotion of Illegal or Antisocial Behaviour (Cox)

• The broadcast was likely to encourage ‘listeners to disregard the official warnings about the cyclone and go about their business as normal so as to not submit to the culture of fear (unless you happen to live on a beach). People who followed this advice potentially put themselves in danger and caused unnecessary pressure on emergency services/first responders’.
• ‘[C]riticising and downplaying public safety warnings and measures pertaining to a natural disaster… while a state of emergency was in place, implicitly supporting listeners to disregard them, constitutes serious antisocial behaviour for the purpose of this standard.’
• ‘[R]educing harm to the public from natural disasters is a key community, legislative and policy focus in New Zealand’ and is comparable with previous findings of the Authority under this standard.  
• ‘Listeners were effectively told that the safety measures that had been put in place were a further extension of authoritarian government control over the lives of citizens – unsubtly inviting parallels to be drawn with the government’s COVID-19 response. The implication was that people who intended to follow the official guidance were mindless sheep who "want to be told what to do all the time", had allowed themselves to be whipped into an "extraordinary frenzy", and "enjoy the panic".’ ‘Although it was not explicitly said, it logically followed from what Mr Hosking and Ms Hawkesby said that people who ignored the warnings and went about business as usual were courageous free thinkers.’
• Objecting to the hosts’ comments 'is not an unjustified restriction on the broadcaster’s freedom of expression. There is plenty of opportunity to robustly critique an emergency response after the event when the perceived danger has passed. However, attacking an emergency response as unnecessary while the predicted event is imminent poses a risk to safety and compromises the ability of the public service to effectively respond to the emergency event if/when it arrives. At the very least, broadcasters should refrain from criticising an emergency response unless there is an overwhelming factual basis for doing so.’
• ‘The seriousness of the conduct is exacerbated by the fact that Newstalk ZB is a designated Civil Defence radio station during emergency situations. These are stations that the public should be able to turn to for reliable information and guidance during such situations.’
• While a NIWA meteorologist was allowed to speak uninterrupted for around two minutes, his statements were undercut by Hawkesby afterwards, and then ridiculed by Hosking when he joined the programme.
• Cox disagreed with NZME that it was sufficient the hosts acknowledged they may be proven wrong, and that useful information about Cyclone Gabrielle was conveyed in other parts of the broadcast and by other presenters. Cox considered the qualification given by the presenters was not strong enough, and action taken later in the day could not negate this conduct.

Accuracy (Cobham, Findlay and Cox)

• Newstalk ZB is a designated Civil Defence radio station during emergencies. Many citizens (particularly older and less media-savvy ones) rely on Newstalk ZB (and particularly the flagship hosts who they see as reliable and knowledgeable speakers of truth) as a key source of news and information. (Cox, Findlay)
• ‘an opinion expressed by a broadcaster must be based on stated facts that are true. An opinion expressed based on untrue facts will breach the standard.’ (Cox)
• ‘Mr Hosking and Ms Hawkesby were clearly expressing an opinion that the threat posed by Cyclone Gabrielle was being overstated and that the public safety measures which had been put in place in anticipation of the cyclone's arrival were unnecessary and demonstrative of a country which "wants to be told what to do all the time" and "enjoys the panic"… However, the underlying facts which Mr Hosking and Ms Hawkesby expressly relied on to found the above opinion were demonstrably false and/or misrepresented.’ These were:
  • ‘The prospect of significant destruction from the cyclone was only possible in the sense that “anything’s possible”.’
  • ‘The wind that NIWA was forecasting for the cyclone as equivalent to "a breezy day" in Wellington’ where you would still dine outside. 130kmh wind as forecast constitutes storm conditions that have destructive results, and Hosking did not even use this figure, instead referring to 100kmh winds (which are still storm conditions). Further the comparison to Wellington was not justified, as a ‘A 2014 NIWA report into Wellington weather showed that three out of 12 listed Weather Stations in the Wellington Region had never recorded a gust at or above 130 km/hr.’
  • ‘The relatively mild weather conditions in Auckland at around 6 am on the morning of 13 February 2023 indicated that Cyclone Gabrielle was not going to be as bad as predicted. This was a misrepresentation as all the major weather forecasters were not predicting Cyclone Gabrielle to reach Auckland until the afternoon/early evening. The fact it was only lightly raining at 6 am was irrelevant to predicting whether the cyclone would be as serious as forecasted, and it was inaccurate to represent otherwise.’
  • ‘The risk posed by Cyclone Gabrielle was storm surge affecting coastal properties. This was a misrepresentation of how damage occurs during a cyclone. Storm-based flooding often occurs not due to coastal storm surge but due to inland rivers being overwhelmed and bursting their banks. This is what in fact happened in the Gisborne and Hawkes Bay regions during Cyclone Gabrielle causing significant property damage and loss of life.’ (Cox)
• ‘Hawkesby effectively told her audience [the NIWA scientist’s] comments were alarmist and not to be taken seriously’ both before and after the interview featured.’ (Findlay)
• ‘Such actions cannot be excused because ZB provided weather forecasts, or comments made later in the day.’ (Findlay)

Offensive and disturbing content, and Fairness (Cobham)

• ‘[C]omments broadcast by Mike Hosking seemed to undermine warnings about the recent cyclone. Similarly Kate Hawkesby, made comments down playing warnings. This is reckless, irresponsible journalism which potentially put lives at risk.’

The broadcaster’s response

[8]  NZME Radio Ltd (NZME) did not uphold the complaints for the following key reasons (including arguments raised after complaints were referred to the Authority):

Promotion of Illegal or Antisocial Behaviour

• The broadcast did not refer to or discuss illegal or serious antisocial behaviour within the meaning of this standard.
• Newstalk ZB is an adult-targeted radio station for 30-64 year olds and Hawkesby and Hosking are known for their frank and forthright discussion of all manner of topics and regular listeners would be aware of this. It did not consider the broadcast was likely to promote illegal or serious antisocial behaviour in light of these contextual factors.

Accuracy

• The standard does not apply to analysis, comment or opinion, and the Authority has previously found that audiences of Newstalk ZB understand hosts such as Mike Hosking to be presenting opinions. On this basis the standard did not apply.
• ‘[T]he hosts relayed important information on the evolving situation with regard to Cyclone Gabrielle regularly during their respective shows. Ms Hawkesby interviewed NIWA meteorologist Chris Brandolino who set out in detail the overnight impact of the cyclone across the country.’
• ‘[T]he host acknowledged that she (and Mr Hosking) may end up being proved wrong’.
• ‘Finally, Newstalk ZB broadcast news bulletins every half hour with updates on the impact of the cyclone as well as regular headline news bulletins.’

Offensive and disturbing content

• ‘Ms Hawkesby is described on the Newstalk ZB website as having a “no-nonsense journalistic approach” and is known for her “hard-hitting opinion[s]”. …Having regard to audience expectations of these programmes and Newstalk ZB generally, we do not consider that the hosts’ statements regarding the impending cyclone during these broadcasts seriously violated community standards of taste and decency or disproportionately offended or disturbed the audience.’

Fairness

• ‘No affected individuals were identified during these broadcasts and therefore this standard does not apply.’

General comments

• Newstalk ZB advertises itself as ‘Your Official Civil Defence station’. Newstalk ZB together with a number of other radio stations broadcasts civil defence official information messages when requested to do so by the Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management (MCDEM), and broadcasting emergency information and formal announcements from MCDEM does not preclude Newstalk ZB from continuing to broadcast its regular scheduled programmes or opinions by the relevant hosts. [The Authority also notes Newstalk ZB is a radio station the government recommends during disasters, as can be seen on the ‘Get Ready’ website published by the Department of Civil Defence.³]

The standards

[9]  The promotion of illegal or antisocial behaviour standard⁴ states broadcast content should not be likely to promote illegal or serious antisocial behaviour taking into account the context (which is crucial in assessing a programme’s likely practical effect⁵) and the audience’s ability to exercise choice and control.

[10]  The purpose of the accuracy standard⁶ is to protect the public from being significantly misinformed.⁷ It states broadcasters should make reasonable efforts to ensure news, current affairs or factual content is accurate in relation to all material points of fact, and does not mislead.⁸

[11]  The offensive and disturbing content standard⁹ states broadcast content should not seriously violate community standards of taste and decency or disproportionately offend or disturb the audience, taking into account: the context of the programme and the wider context of the broadcast; and the information given by the broadcaster to enable the audience to exercise choice and control over their own viewing or listening.

[12]  The fairness standard¹⁰ states broadcasters should deal fairly with any individual or organisation taking part or referred to in a broadcast.

Our analysis and findings

[13]  We have listened to the broadcast and read the correspondence listed in the Appendix.

Freedom of expression and overview of outcome

[14]  Our starting point is to consider the right to freedom of expression. When we determine a complaint, our task is to weigh up the right to freedom of expression – which includes both the broadcaster’s right to offer ideas and information, and the audience’s right to receive those – against any harm potentially caused by the broadcast. We may only intervene and uphold a complaint when the resulting limitation on the right to freedom of expression is reasonable and justified in a free and democratic society.¹¹

[15]  Generally speaking, it is a key function of broadcasters’ exercise of the right to freedom of expression, and in the public interest, that they should be permitted to question official responses to civil emergencies, as the measures taken can have significant effects on our population.

[16]  The tone of this broadcast and Hawkesby and Hoskings’ comments was, in our view, dismissive and insensitive. It was particularly insensitive to those already suffering the effects of Gabrielle, to focus on what were, essentially, minor inconveniences experienced so far in Auckland. This sentiment was shared at the time by other media coverage reacting to the hosts ‘downplaying’ and ‘trivialising’ the seriousness of the situation.¹²

[17]  However, while the hosts’ comments may seem distasteful or inappropriate in hindsight (given we now know that ex-Tropical Cyclone Gabrielle caused significant destruction across the country and resulted in the deaths of 11 people) ultimately we did not consider the broadcast as a whole, which included countering comments, news bulletins and others emphasising the seriousness and the warnings in place throughout, breached broadcasting standards or caused harm at a level justifying the restriction of freedom of expression.

[18]  We explain our reasons under each of the nominated standards below.

Promotion of illegal or antisocial behaviour

[19]  The purpose of this standard is to prevent broadcasts that encourage audiences to break the law, or are otherwise likely to promote criminal or serious antisocial activity.¹³ Antisocial activity involves actions which are likely to have consequences for people in the real world. It is broader than illegal activity and can include other antisocial behaviour.¹⁴

[20]  We accept that people ignoring warnings of a natural disaster and taking actions (such as non-necessary travel, not evacuating, or not preparing for an incoming natural disaster) that put themselves and rescuers at risk of injury or death, could reasonably be considered serious antisocial behaviour. The question for the Authority was whether the broadcast was likely to promote this behaviour.

[21]  Multiple excerpts from the broadcast of Early Edition above, such as ‘What Cyclone? I'm just wondering if we've overcooked the cyclone warnings just a wee bit’, ‘It's bloody ridiculous for the Government and councils to be behaving like doomsday preppers… Dry as a bone in the city so far, isn't it’ and ‘There is no reason for this level of hysteria’ suggest that Hawkesby (and Hosking) did not take the warnings from weather forecasters, as well as from central and local government, seriously, and thought measures being taken in anticipation of ex-Tropical Cyclone Gabrielle were excessive and unnecessary.

[22]  Taken in isolation, such comments may have the effect of encouraging listeners to ignore these warnings, as the hosts appeared of the view they were unnecessary and the Government was overreacting. We are conscious that as Newstalk ZB broadcasters, Hawkesby and Hosking are in a position of influence, and some people do trust them and listen to what they have to say.

[23]  However, the standard emphasises that context is crucial in assessing the programme’s likely practical effect,¹⁵ and so we must consider the impact of the broadcast overall, not just the comments complained about. We considered the following factors relevant in assessing the practical effect of the programme as a whole:

• The programme was a live broadcast, and concerned the first hours of the developing story of ex-Tropical Cyclone Gabrielle hitting the country.
• Many of the comments made by Hawkesby and Hosking specifically concerned Auckland and the situation as it currently stood on the morning of 13 February, rather than nationwide or over the entire day/week. For example: ‘A lot of rain, a lot of wind their way and the odd barn going over in Northland. So I think that's probably right in terms of coming down the country and they're getting hit quite badly at the moment at the top. Here in Auckland City, so far, nada, absolutely nothing’.
• At multiple stages throughout the programme, the statements made by Hawkesby and Hosking were couched with statements to the effect that it was too early to tell the impact of ex-Cyclone Gabrielle, and they may be proven wrong, for example: ‘If it comes in like a wrecking ball this afternoon, then you know they were right and maybe it was just a bit slower than we thought’; ‘it may well be coming in later on this afternoon’; Hawkesby:  ‘We may eat all our words come this afternoon.’ Hosking:  ‘It's possible. Anything's possible.’
• Importantly, Early Edition included serious warnings regarding the weather from newsreaders, reporters, a Member of Parliament and a NIWA meteorologist. All of this coverage indicated to the audience that there was a significant weather event currently in progress which should be taken seriously. Coromandel MP Scott Simpson in particular set out specific actions people could take or avoid in order to stay safe.

[24]  Overall, the broadcast lurched between accurate, serious warnings and interviews (and experiences of those affected so far, through listener texts and emails); and the hosts’ (and some listeners’) flippant opinions regarding their personal frustrations and experiences, questioning the safety measures in place. The question for the Authority is whether, in the context outlined above, the dismissive comments made by Hawkesby and Hosking would have encouraged people to ignore weather warnings and act in ways that put themselves and rescuers at risk of injury or death.

[25]  We do not believe that this would have been the broadcast’s likely practical effect. The overall impact on listeners of this broadcast would be that there was a serious weather situation incoming, as conveyed multiple times, but that the worst of it had yet to hit Auckland CBD, and the hosts believed pre-emptive steps taken in Auckland went too far. Neither Hosking nor Hawkesby explicitly encouraged people to ignore warnings or take risky behaviour, and both acknowledged they may be proven wrong as the situation developed. On this basis, we cannot conclude the antisocial behaviour of taking unnecessary risks during a natural disaster was ‘promoted’ to the audience as required by the standard.

[26]  On this basis, considering as well the right to freedom of expression as outlined above at paragraphs [14]-[17], we do not uphold the complaint under the promotion of illegal or antisocial behaviour standard.

Accuracy

[27]  The essence of the complaints under the accuracy standard is that the views expressed by Hawkesby and Hosking were misleading both by dismissing the seriousness of the situation and warnings (including as discussed by expert interviewees), and by basing their opinions on erroneous facts.

[28]  Guideline 6.1 of the accuracy standard states the requirement for factual accuracy does not apply to statements which are clearly distinguishable as analysis, comment or opinion, rather than statements of fact. However, broadcasters should still make reasonable efforts to ensure analysis, comment or opinion is not materially misleading with respect to any facts: referred to; or upon which the analysis, comment or opinion is based. To ‘mislead’ in the context of the accuracy standard means ‘to give another a wrong idea or impression of the facts’.¹⁶ In other words, opinions reliant on facts should accurately state those facts, as the Authority has held in previous decisions.¹⁷

[29]  The ‘facts’ that the complainants considered had been misrepresented in the broadcast were:

• The prospect of significant destruction from the ex-Tropical Cyclone was only possible in the sense that “anything’s possible”.
• The wind forecast wasn’t far worse than a ‘breezy day in Wellington’.
• Claiming Auckland was not affected by the ex-Tropical Cyclone was misleading as the weather system had not arrived in the area yet.
• Claiming the risk posed by the ex-Tropical Cyclone was limited to storm surge affecting coastal properties.

[30]   It was also submitted that it breached the standard to dismiss the views of NIWA Meteorologist Chris Brandolino.

The prospect of significant destruction from the ex-Tropical Cyclone was only possible in the sense that “anything’s possible”

[31]  The relevant exchange in the broadcast was:

Hawkesby: We may eat all our words come this afternoon.

Hosking:    It's possible. Anything's possible.

[32]  We do not consider the expression ‘Anything’s possible’ in relation to the developing weather patterns could reasonably be interpreted as a statement of fact or an opinion based on an erroneous fact. It was contextualised by both Hawkesby’s qualifications she may be proved wrong as the situation (for Auckland in particular) developed, and the predictions and warnings expressed by others interviewed throughout the programme.

[33]  On this basis, we find this statement was not misleading and did not breach the accuracy standard.

The wind forecast wasn’t far worse than a ‘breezy day in Wellington’

[34]  During the broadcast Hosking stated ‘Anyone who lives in Wellington, has lived in Wellington, 100Ks is a breezy day. You've still got an outdoor table at the cafe’.

[35]  The wind forecast as stated by NIWA scientist Chris Brandolino during the broadcast (which Hosking was referencing) was gusts of 100 to 110km/h in Auckland, and 130km/h gusts in Western and Northern areas of Auckland. The strongest gust recorded in Wellington ever is 248km/h (recorded near where the Brooklyn Turbine now sits), and the strongest gust ever recorded at Wellington International Airport is 116.7km/h.¹⁸

[36]  Responding to complainant Leighton Cox, wind gusts of up to 130km/h – the highest figure quoted by Brandolino – would be an exceptionally windy day in Wellington. Wind gusts of up to 100km/h (the figure used by Hosking) would be less unusual. However, a region with buildings, trees and other structures that are not designed for or accustomed to extreme winds would be impacted differently when compared to the same event in Wellington.¹⁹ And, as Brandolino noted, the effects of wind are exacerbated by wet ground conditions.

[37]  On this basis, Hosking arguably misquoted Brandolino and was missing key context. However, in the full context of the broadcast we do not consider this single flippant remark about Wellington winds would materially misinform the audience of the wind speed and damage expected during ex-Tropical Cyclone Gabrielle. Further, wind speed of 100km/h is not unheard of in Wellington.

[38]  For these reasons we find the statement did not breach the accuracy standard.

Claiming Auckland was not affected by the ex-Cyclone was misleading as the weather system had not arrived in the area yet

[39]  Throughout the broadcast it was evident Hawkesby’s view was that there had been no serious impact from the storm in Auckland at the time of broadcast. However, she also stated several times that she would need to wait until later in the day for the worst of the storm to arrive and Chris Brandolino (and others interviewed) also made this clear – that is, the worst was yet to come.

[40]  On this basis we do not consider the broadcast was materially inaccurate or misleading on this point.

Claiming the risk posed by ex-Cyclone Gabrielle was limited to storm surge affecting coastal properties

[41]  In the broadcast Hosking stated, ‘If you're by a beach and there's a storm surge, that I get. The rest of it, I'm yet to be convinced’.

[42]  Again, we consider this was framed as Hosking’s analysis and opinion that storm surge was a clear risk presented by ex-Tropical Cyclone Gabrielle, but that he believed other risks had not yet been shown to be likely.

[43]  We acknowledge the complainant’s concerns that it would be inaccurate for the broadcast to claim that the only risk from ex-Cyclone Gabrielle was storm surge. The risks posed by the predicted heavy rain and high winds were clearly not limited to this, through issues such as rivers breaching banks, power lines and trees being downed, surface flooding and roads and hillsides slipping.

[44]  However, this statement was sufficiently framed as an opinion questioning whether the impact of the storm would affect areas other than the coast - since the full effects of the storm were yet to be seen - rather than a statement of fact. This opinion was not reliant on an underlying fact. These comments were consistent with themes throughout the broadcast but were also qualified by other countering comments and experts. While Hosking’s analysis did not sufficiently acknowledge the other obvious dangers above, it was still an opinion rather than a statement of fact, and on that basis the standard does not apply.

Dismissing the views of NIWA Meteorologist Chris Brandolino

[45]  In addition to the four points identified above, Findlay also argued the broadcast breached the accuracy standard as ‘Hawkesby effectively told her audience [the NIWA scientist’s] comments were alarmist and not to be taken seriously’ both before and after the interview featured.

[46]  We acknowledge that the hosts dismissed Brandolino’s expert opinion in the minutes following his interview through statements such as:

• ‘”Kate, if nothing much comes of the storm, can it be renamed Cyclone Cindy? Overhyped, no delivery.” [laughs] Very good, Marcus’ (which was stated in the moments following the interview); and
• ‘I'm listening to your mate, Chris from the MetService. He's now talking about 100K winds as being like a hurricane… Anyone who lives in Wellington, has lived in Wellington, 100Ks is a breezy day. You've still got an outdoor table at the cafe’.

[47]  However, these comments constituted analysis, comment or opinion to which the standard does not apply. Additionally, Brandolino was one of numerous perspectives presented during the programme who spoke at length concerning the weather predictions and warnings, and Hawkesby clearly acknowledged and thanked Brandolino for his expertise, saying ‘Very comprehensive picture. Chris, appreciate you being with us and your expertise. Thanks very much. Chris Brandolino, who is a NIWA meteorologist.’

[48]  Overall, the hosts’ treatment of this one interviewee wasn’t likely to mislead the audience regarding the seriousness of the situation in the context of the entire programme.

Conclusion

[49]  Having found the programme was not misleading, it is not necessary to determine whether or not the broadcaster made reasonable efforts to ensure the accuracy of the programme.²⁰

[50]  Although two statements made during the broadcast (‘100ks is a breezy day [in Wellington]’; and Hosking’s statement regarding the storm surge risk) had some potential to be misleading in isolation, overall we found that in the full context of the programme where multiple weather warnings and real-time updates were given, the alleged inaccuracies would not have materially affected the audience’s overall understanding of the situation regarding the ex-Tropical Cyclone. On this basis, and considering as well the right to freedom of expression as outlined above at [14]-[17], we do not uphold the complaints under the accuracy standard.

The remaining standards

[51]  We have also found no breach of the remaining standards for the following reasons:

• Offensive and disturbing content: The offensive and disturbing content standard is concerned with content that is likely to cause widespread disproportionate offence or distress or undermine widely shared community standards.²¹ This broadcast of Early Edition did not contain any such content and was within audience expectations of the programme and the station. We consider the concerns raised under this standard have been appropriately dealt with under the promotion of illegal or antisocial behaviour and accuracy standards above.
• Fairness: The fairness standard applies only to individuals or organisations taking part in a broadcast.²² The complainant who raised this standard did not identify any person or organisation they believed was treated unfairly by the broadcaster.

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

Susie Staley
Chair
28 June 2023    

Appendix

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

Allan Cobham

1  Allan Cobham’s formal complaint to NZME - 20 February 2023

2  NZME’s decision on the complaint - 20 March 2023

3  Cobham’s referral to the Authority - 20 March 2023

4  NZME confirming no further comments – 6 April 2023

5  Cobham confirming scope of complaint – 4 June 2023

Ian Findlay

6  Ian Findlay’s formal complaint to NZME - 20 Feb 2023

7  NZME’s decision on the complaint - 20 March 2023

8  Findlay’s referral to the Authority - 21 March 2023

9  NZME’s further comments - 6 April 2023

10  Findlay’s further comments - 6 April 2023

11  NZME’s further comments - 20 April 2023

12  Findlay's further comments - 14 May 2023

13  NZME’s further comments - 19 May 2023

14  Findlay's further comments - 19 May 2023

15  NZME’s final comments - 26 May 2023

16  Findlay's final comments - 8 June 2023

Leighton Cox

17  Leighton Cox’s formal complaint to NZME – 8 March 2023

18  NZME’s decision on the complaint - 23 March 2023

19  Cox’s referral to the Authority - 18 April 2023

20  NZME’s further comments - 9 May 2023

21  Cox's further comments - 11 May 2023

22  NZME’s final comments - 19 May 2023

23  Cox confirming no further comments – 23 May 2023

¹ For further details of the timing of events concerning ex-Cyclone Gabrielle, please see: Lisa Murray “Tropical Cyclone Gabrielle – Event summary February 2023” Metservice (19 February 2023); and William Hewett et al. “As it happened: Cyclone Gabrielle live updates - Monday, February 13” Newshub (online ed, 14 February 2023) from 5.21am to 6.03am
² During the complaints process it was confirmed that Cobham’s complaint related to the exchange between Hawkesby and Hosking during Early Edition (although originally he heard this in another broadcast).
³ Get Ready “Stay informed” (accessed 17 May 2023) <getready.govt.nz> see: ‘Radio:If the power goes out, a solar- or battery-powered radio (or your car radio) can help you keep up to date with the latest news. In an emergency, tune to these stations: … NewstalkZB’
⁴ Standard 3, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁵ Guideline 3.1
⁶ Standard 6, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁷ Commentary, Standard 6, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 16
⁸ Guideline 6.1
⁹ Standard 1, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
¹⁰ Standard 8, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
¹¹ Introduction, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 4
¹² Darren Bevan “Cyclone Gabrielle: Kate Hawkesby, Leo Molloy under fire for downplaying storm” Newshub (online ed, 14 February 2023); Toby Manhire “Hot takes through the ages from Mike Hosking and Kate Hawkesby” The Spinoff (online ed, 16 February 2023); Hayden Donnell, Mediawatch “Radio hosts fixate on schools closing as Gabrielle closes in” RNZ (online ed, 19 February 2023)
¹³ Commentary, Standard 3 of the Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 11
¹⁴ Commentary, Standard 3 of the Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 11
¹⁵ Guideline 3.1
¹⁶ Attorney General of Samoa v TVWorks Ltd [2012] NZHC 131, [2012] NZAR 407 at [98]
¹⁷ For example: Burne-Field and NZME Radio Ltd, Decision No. 2020-040 at [17]-[18]
¹⁸ “Welcome to Wellington, the windiest city in the world” SurferToday (accessed 18 May 2023) <www.surfertoday.com>; Tom Fitzsimons “How windy is Wellington, really?” Stuff (online ed, 9 December 2011)
¹⁹ Julie Iles “Windy Wellington shaped by nature - developments in the city dependent on strict wind regulations” Stuff (online ed, 20 July 2019); Forest Research “Wind and Trees” (accessed 18 May 2023) <forestresearch.gov.uk>
²⁰ Van der Merwe and Mediaworks TV Ltd, Decision No. 2019-015 at [21]
²¹ Commentary, Standard 1, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 8
²² Standard 8, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand