England and Television New Zealand Ltd - 1995-030
Members
- I W Gallaway (Chair)
- L M Loates
- W J Fraser
Dated
Complainant
- R J England
Number
1995-030
Programme
NewsnightBroadcaster
Television New Zealand LtdChannel/Station
TV2
Summary
The possibility of a nationwide strike by primary school teachers was a topic
reported in the media during February 1995 as was the strike itself on the 1st and 2nd
March.
Mr England complained to Television New Zealand Ltd that the news broadcast on 1
March at 10.30pm on TV2, Newsnight, omitted any reference to the strike. He noted,
however, the broadcast included an item about an overweight pig in the United States.
He considered the omission to be a misrepresentation of the day's news and,
therefore, in breach of the broadcasting standards.
Questioning whether the complaint involved broadcasting standards, TVNZ explained
that Newsnight was targetted at a young adult audience which was not committed to
watching news programmes. Maintaining that the strike had been dealt with
extensively the previous evening and that the story had not developed during the day,
and that the items on Newsnight were chosen by professional journalists, TVNZ
declined to uphold the complaint. Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Mr England
referred his complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the
Broadcasting Act 1989.
For the reasons below, the Authority declined to determine the complaint.
Decision
The members of the Authority have viewed Newsnight to which the complaint relates
and have read the correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). As is its practice,
the Authority has determined the complaint without a formal hearing.
A nation-wide strike by primary school teachers took place on the 1st and 2nd March
1995. It was not dealt with on TV2's Newsnight broadcast at 10.30pm on 1 March
1995. The news programme began with an item on the search for drugs in one
secondary school and included one about an overweight pig in the United States.
Mr England complained to TVNZ that the programme's omission of the day's "single
most important item of news" breached the broadcasting standards. When he referred
his complaint to the Authority, he argued that TVNZ, by omitting news about the
teacher's strike, had misled the public.
TVNZ questioned whether the complaint raised a matter of broadcasting standards. It
expressed the opinion that the issue was one of a viewer's preference to which the
statutory complaint's process did not apply. Nevertheless, "to demonstrate good
faith and a recognition of your genuinely-held concerns", TVNZ assessed Mr
England's complaint under standard G7 of the Television Code of Broadcasting
Practice. It requires broadcasters:
G7 To avoid the use of any deceptive programme practice which takes
advantage of the confidence viewers have in the integrity of broadcasters.
Noting that it employed professional journalists to decide what were the significant
news events each day, TVNZ said consideration also had to be given to the special
nature of Newsnight:
"Newsnight" is specifically aimed at the young adult audience – an audience with
wide eclectic tastes, but not necessarily committed to the regular watching of
news programmes. The programme has to woo these viewers into watching
serious news material by presenting it in a manner which is likely to attract their
attention.
As for Newsnight on 1 March, TVNZ explained that the strike had been dealt with as
an important story on Newsnight the previous evening and that it had not "moved"
significantly in the following 24 hours. As for the item on the overweight pig:
... TVNZ notes that all news media outlets carry material which, while of little
consequence in the global sense, is nonetheless interesting or at least a curiosity
piece. Without such material news programmes (and newspapers too!) would
quickly become bland and repetitive. The tale of the overweight pig comes into
the category of the "fancy that" story – a good picture story and intriguing too.
TVNZ also pointed out that the serious late night news watcher would have been able
to view One Network News: Late Edition at 11.00pm on TV1. It declined to uphold
the complaint.
The Authority's first task was to decide whether the complaint raised a matter of
broadcasting standards. Under s.6(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989, people may
complain formally to a broadcaster about:
... any programme broadcast by it where the complaint constitutes, in respect of
that programme, an allegation that the broadcaster has failed to comply with
section 4 of this Act;
The provision was considered by the Authority in one of its earlier decisions (No:
18/90, 5.10.90) when it wrote:
The fact is that it is only in rare circumstances that the non-broadcast of a
programme or an item within a programme will give rise to a breach of the
Standards included in the Television Programme Codes
What might amount to "rare circumstances" was discussed in Decision No: 112/93
(8.9.93) where the Authority stated:
The Authority accepts that, usually, the non-broadcast of an event is not a
matter to which the complaints process in the Broadcasting Act is applicable.
Furthermore, it accepts that in most cases it is a matter of editorial discretion
whether an item is considered to be worthy of broadcast as a news item by the
broadcaster. Section 4(1)(d) provides the principal exception to the approach as
it requires that reasonable efforts are made or reasonable opportunities are given
to present significant points of view on controversial matters within the period
of current interest.
The current complaint was concerned about the total omission on Newsnight on 1
March of any reference to the primary school teachers' strike. It was not alleged that
the matter had been discussed but a significant point of view had been omitted.
Accordingly, following its earlier decisions, the Authority considered that the
complaint about the non-broadcast of a particular news item did not raise an issue of
broadcasting standards. Therefore, it declined to determine the complaint.
For the above reasons, the Authority declines to determine the complaint.
Signed for and on behalf of the Authority
Iain Gallaway
Chairperson
11 May 1995
Appendix
R J England's Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd - 2 March 1995
Mr England of Wellington complained to Television New Zealand Ltd about
Newsnight on 1 March broadcast on TV2 at 10.30pm. Broadcasting standards, he
wrote, were breached as the programme did not honestly represent the day's events in
New Zealand.
Mr England said that the teacher's strike was the day's "single most important item
of news" but Newsnight not only had omitted any reference to the strike but had
broadcast an item about an overweight pig in the United States.
TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint - 17 March 1995
In its response, TVNZ expressed doubt as to whether the matter was appropriate for
the formal complaints process. While it was of the opinion that the complaint
reflected Mr England's programming preference, to demonstrate good faith it said that
it intended to respond to the letter as a formal complaint which alleged a breach of
standard G7 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice.
Commenting that every viewer had an opinion about the day's most significant news
event, TVNZ explained that it used experienced professional journalists to produce its
news broadcasts. It also emphasised the nature of Newsnight which, it said, was
specifically aimed at young adult viewers who were not committed to watching news
programmes regularly. Newsnight, it continued:
... has to woo these viewers into watching serious news material by presenting it
in a manner which is likely to attract their attention.
As for Mr England's specific concern, TVNZ argued that there had been no significant
developments that day about the strike, unlike the previous day when it had been the
lead item.
The item that led Newsnight on 1 March, TVNZ added, involved a controversy at a
secondary school where children had been strip searched for drugs. That story, it
said, was of considerable interest to the target audience as it dealt with an issue which
was keenly debated among young adults.
TVNZ also pointed out that all news outlets carried "curiosity pieces" and the story
about the overweight pig was such - a "fancy that" item - "a good picture story and
intriguing too".
In response to Mr England's point about a hypothetical viewer who relied on late
evening television news, TVNZ commented that One Network News: Late Edition at
11.00pm on TV One was the well-known mainstream news programme.
Declining to uphold the complaint, TVNZ concluded:
It is TVNZ's view that "Newsnight" has become well-established as a news
programme with a specific target audience which has different tastes from that
which watches "mainstream" news and current affairs. In the context of
"Newsnight", TVNZ is satisfied that the line-up on 1 March was not in any
way deceptive, and that therefore Standard G7 was not breached.
Mr England's Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 20 March
1995
Dissatisfied with TVNZ's decision, in a lengthy letter Mr England referred his
complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the
Broadcasting Act 1989.
Maintaining that the teachers' strike was the news story of the day, Mr England
argued that TVNZ justified its decision by defining "news" so liberally that it even
included an item about an overweight pig in the United States. He wrote:
I believe, by omission TVNZ has misled the viewing public. If TVNZ is able to
screen an item on an overweight pig in the US (which has nothing whatsoever to
do with NZ) then it is BOUND to screen an item on a major event affecting
many New Zealanders!
He commented on a number of the points made by TVNZ in its letter to him and
insisted that the quality of Newsnight on 1 March was deficient.
Indicating that his later comments were not specifically associated with his complaint,
Mr England questioned aspects of the impartiality of TVNZ's news service and
expressed the opinion that Shortland Street was being used for "social engineering"
purposes.
TVNZ's Response to the Authority - 30 March 1995
Noting that it had questioned in its response to Mr England whether he had raised a
matter of broadcasting standards, TVNZ argued initially that the Authority should
decline to determine the complaint on the basis that it did not raise a matter of
standards.
Should the Authority decide to determine the complaint, TVNZ said it was entitled to
target a news programme at a particular audience. It wrote:
Mr England seems to question TVNZ's right to target a news programme at a
specific audience. He seems particularly upset that a programme which carries
the title "Newsnight" should omit what he considered the most significant news
event of the day (even though there was no movement in the story that day).
We believe that an effort to "woo" those who are perhaps reluctant viewers of
mainstream news programmes must include items which are of particular
interest to that target audience.
Acknowledging that what the items should be was a matter of editorial judgment,
TVNZ pointed out that it employed trained professional journalists to make those
decisions.
Mr England's Final Comment - 6 April 1955
In a brief comment, Mr England stated that he had already provided the Authority
with the relevant information.