BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

3 National News screened between 6.00–7.00pm each evening is TV3's main daily

news broadcast.

Alleging that the programme usually displayed a "New Right monetarist bias", Mr

Gadd complained that the item on March 17 typified that slant when it cited the

upgrading of the country's credit rating and increase in house sales as evidence of

economic "good news".

Maintaining that it reported not only the widely accepted evidence of the recovery but

also the pain inflicted by some of the reforms, TV3 declined to uphold the complaint.

Dissatisfied with TV3's decision, Mr Gadd referred his complaint to the Authority

under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

For the reasons given below, the Authority declined to uphold the complaint.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed a number of the items on 3 National News

on 17 March and have read the correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). As is

its practice, the Authority has determined the complaint without a formal hearing.

Mr Gadd complained that TV3's 3 National News displayed a "New Right monetarist

bias" and cited as evidence an item on 17 March which dealt with the raising of New

Zealand's credit rating. It was introduced with the remark that it was a "green light for

the economy". After positive comment from an unnamed person who spoke from an

economic perspective and from the Labour Party finance spokesperson, and references

to the increasing number of house sales and the decreasing number of registered

unemployed, the item concluded by the reporter stating that it had been a "good news

day for the government and for the country".

The information presented could well have had another interpretation, Mr Gadd

maintained. For example, it could be seen as evidence that the New Zealand economy

was now in the service of off-shore investors and had ceased to function for the

benefit of New Zealanders. He argued that the news item failed to be impartial and

balanced.

TV3 assessed the complaint under standard G14 of the Television code of

Broadcasting Practice. It states:

G14 News must be presented accurately, objectively and impartially.

TV3 acknowledged that the economic news could be interpreted in a variety of ways

but, overall, it maintained that the bulk of the material supported an approach which

accepted that an economic recovery was taking place. Explaining that its news was

compiled from a number of sources, TV3 noted that other items on 17 March had

dealt with the reduction of public hospital services as a result of the health reforms

and the closure of a "second chance" school because of the lack of government funding.

Because of the lack of specificity which applies to the expression, the "new right", the

Authority sought advice from an experienced political commentator as to an

acceptable definition of the term. It was informed that it was a term used to refer to

politicians and general political policies – either favourably or disparagingly – rather

than to describe a coherent and comprehensive economic policy. Moreover, although

some politicians who might conform to an approach which, broadly brushed, could be

described as "new right", it could not be specifically confined to any narrow section of

the political spectrum.

In the item complained about, a person described as the Opposition finance

spokesperson (although unnamed, he was recognisable as Dr Cullen), spoke positively

about the upgrading and the political commentator spoken to by the Authority

remarked that whether or not Dr Cullen can be regarded as adhering to a "new right

monetarist" policy would substantially depend on the political stance of the person

making that suggestion. Similarly, during the late 1970s the late Sir Robert Muldoon

frequently referred to the high level of New Zealand's credit rating as an example of

the success of his economic policies. It was unlikely, the political commentator

observed, that he would be described as a supporter of the new right.

In examining the allegation that TV3's news displayed a "New Right" bias on 17

March 1994, the Authority noted that the reporter, in describing the credit upgrading

positively, was summarising the commentators included in the item (Dr Cullen and the

unnamed economic commentator) and the economic indicators to which he had

referred. The Authority did not consider that the reporter had been editorialising.

The Authority is aware that it is possible for news – or a particular section of the

news such as economics, health or housing – to be dominated by one perspective if the

commentators chosen to contribute reflect the same perspective. To avoid that

happening if the item or items are of significance, it is important in the Authority's

opinion that independent commentators be named, and when relevant, their

employment or professional affiliation be included. The Authority regarded TV3's

failure to name the economic commentator in the item complained about – even if not a

matter of specific broadcasting standards – was a significant broadcasting misjudgment

of the news and current affairs requirements.

The Authority acknowledged that while the economic material dealt with on 17 March

could be seen as reflecting a "New Right" stance, other items broadcast that evening on

other matters adopted an approach which could not be so described in that they

covered negative effects of the government's policy.

Standard G14 requires that news be presented accurately, objectively and positively.

The Authority sympathises with Mr Gadd – and with all viewers – who feel that they

are required to watch and listen regularly to the same commentators or those with

similar ideologies. As noted above, the Authority believes that all commentators

should be named and, where appropriate, aligned to their institutional background.

However, in view of the positive support that the upgrading had received from at least

two apparently different sources, plus the reference to the decline in registered

unemployment, the Authority accepted that the reporter's comment on 17 March that

"it has been a good news day for the Government and for the country" was neither

inaccurate nor did it display bias.

For the reasons set forth above, the Authority declines to uphold the complaint.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Iain Gallaway
Chairperson
20 October 1994

Appendix

Mr Gadd's Complaint to TV3 Network Services Limited - 18 March 1994

Mr Bernard Gadd of Auckland complained to TV3 Network Services Ltd about an

item of economic news reported on 3 National News broadcast between 6.00pm -

7.00pm on Thursday 17 March.

Alleging that 3 National News consistently displayed a "New Right monetarist bias",

Mr Gadd said that the approach was typified by reporting as "good news" the

upgrading of New Zealand's credit rating by an overseas investment service and an

increase in house sales. That material, he maintained and other economic evidence was

open to "widely different interpretations" and, he added:

They can with perhaps more justification be seen as evidence that New

Zealand's economy is now in the service of off-shore investors and the

wealthy, and has ceased to function as an economy for the nation as a whole.

The number of house sales, he observed, could be related to ill-health and

unemployment when combined with other news items that evening on the health

reforms and the closing of a second chance school. Mr Gadd continued:

... the plain fact of the matter is that virtually every major economic indicator

shows that the economy is functioning less well in 1994 than it was in 1974 or

1984, and less well especially for the poor and the average income earner.

In summary, he argued that TV3's news failed to be balanced and impartial.

TV3's Response to the Formal Complaint - 15 June 1994

TV3 advised Mr Gadd of its Complaints Committee's decision and reported that the

complaint had been assessed under standard G14 of the Television Code of

Broadcasting Practice.

TV3 began:

The [Complaints] Committee understands that the substantive issue in your

complaint is that examples of an economic recovery are open to widely

different interpretations and that evidence may in fact suggest New Zealand's

economy is in the service of offshore investors and the wealthy.

It responded:

The [Complaints] Committee accepts that statistics can be carefully chosen

and interpreted to support all sorts of arguments. But there is a growing

wealth of material to support the argument that an economic recovery is under

way in New Zealand. Material to support the argument is widely reported

every day.

Citing reports from other media which confirmed that comment, TV3 argued that it

also reported evidence of the pain inflicted by some of the reforms. It pointed to the

two items noted by Mr Gadd in this complaint about the news on 17 March.

Mr Gadd's Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 22 June 1994

Dissatisfied with TV3's response, Mr Gadd referred his complaint to the

Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

He argued in some detail that TV3's reply substantiated his complaint as the sources

cited in support of TV3's approach, notably the government and big business, had

well established New Right allegiances. He added:

But the TV3 reply to my complaint goes much further, it actually perverts not

only part of my complaint but the available evidence on the impact of the

alleged economic recovery.

He contended that not only was the economy causing "pain", but that the economic

benefit to some came at the expense of economic and social harm to others. As

evidence of the harm, he referred to the high teen suicide rate in New Zealand.

Questioning why some people were hungry and inadequately housed in a country

which produced food and timber and why the rate of unemployment was unlikely to

be less than 7% long term, Mr Gadd maintained that economic news could only be

reported positively when the "economy" had been defined by the New Right:

... to mean that which serves only the wealthy and big business and

transnational corporations, like the owners of TV3.

With TV3's news, he concluded, reality was inseparable from ideology.

TV3's Responses to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 7 July and 10

August 1994

As is its practice, the Authority sought the broadcaster's response to the complaint.

TV3 commented in its second letter:

The [Complaints] Committee totally rejects any suggestion that 3 National

News shows a systematic bias towards reports favourable to New Right

interpretations. The suggestion is so absurd that the TV3 Complaints

Committee does not believe there is anything to be gained by further discussing

this at length, thereby giving the allegation some credence.

Mr Gadd's Final Comment to the Authority - 18 August 1994

When asked if he wished to comment briefly on TV3's reply, Mr Gadd expressed the

opinion that the approach adopted by TV3's letter indicated that it had lost the

argument. TV3 had, he continued, admitted that its news presentation was

subservient to the reigning ideology and, he concluded:

I recognise that it is indeed a challenge to a transnational corporation which has

done so very well out of the current New Right policies in acquiring a major

public asset to act with consistent responsibility and impartiality in political

and economic news presentation. Regrettably it is a challenge that TV3 has

been unable to meet.

I wish to make a final point very clearly - TV3's New Right news bias is a

continuing thing, very blatant at times, and it is therefore a continuing

endangerment to or limitation of free and democratic political and economic

debate by New Zealanders.