BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

The Jalal Abu Ghaynem district of Jerusalem was described as a "traditional" Arab

district in a news item which referred to the construction of a Jewish housing

settlement there. The item was broadcast on National Radio on 18 April 1997 at

10.00am.

The Wellington Palestine Group described the item as grossly misleading because it

conveyed the impression that the Israeli government was building the settlement as a

way of overcoming Arab exclusiveness and hostility against Jews. In fact, it pointed

out, the settlement was illegal and was being built on territory which was under Israeli

occupation.

Radio New Zealand Ltd responded that the text of the item did not support the

Group's interpretation, and declined to uphold the complaint. Dissatisfied with that

decision, the Group referred the complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority

under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989 for investigation and review.

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

Decision

The members of the Authority have listened to a tape of the item complained about

and have read the correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). On this occasion,

the Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

According to a news item broadcast on National Radio on 18 April 1997 at 10.00am,

which dealt with Middle East peace efforts, Israeli-Palestinian peace talks were stalled

because of Palestinian opposition to an Israeli decision to start a Jewish housing

project in "traditionally Arab East Jerusalem".

The Wellington Palestine Group complained formally to RNZ that the impression

thus conveyed by the item was that the Israeli government was building the settlement

as a way of overcoming "traditional" Arab exclusiveness and hostility against Jews.

The Group described this as totally misleading, pointing out that the settlement was

illegal and was in violation of a peace agreement. It noted that the settlement was

being built on territory under Israeli occupation, internationally recognised as part of

the Occupied Territories, and that Palestinian opposition to the settlement was based

not on tradition but on a wish to prevent Israel from absorbing the region into the

Jewish state.

RNZ did not agree with the Group's interpretation of the item, which it described as

an individual interpretation of what the words meant, in contrast to the obvious and

straightforward meaning. RNZ declined to uphold the complaint, but noted that the

power to dismiss a complaint as vexatious, or one which should not in the

circumstances be considered, was reserved to the Broadcasting Standards Authority.

The Authority recognises that Israel's decision to build a settlement in East Jerusalem

is contentious, and that it is understandable why the peace talks have stalled. While

the Authority acknowledges that the item was barely adequate in its description of the

location of the housing project, it does not find a breach of standards. It again reminds

broadcasters of the need for clarity, especially when dealing with items concerning the

Middle East.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
17 July 1997

Appendix

Wellington Palestine Group's Complaint to Radio New Zealand Ltd - 30 April

1997

The Wellington Palestine Group lodged a formal complaint about a news item

broadcast on National Radio on 18 April at 10.00am. The item concerned the

construction of a Jewish housing settlement in the Jalal Abu Ghaynem district of

Jerusalem. The area was described in the news item as a "traditional" Arab district.

The Group maintained that the impression thus conveyed was that the Israeli

government was building the settlement as a way of overcoming "traditional" Arab

exclusiveness and hostility towards Jews.

The Group wrote:

This is grossly misleading. The settlement is illegal. The settlement is in

violation of a peace agreement. The territory it is being built on is under Israeli

occupation. It is internationally recognised as part of the Occupied Territories.

There is a long standing international consensus on this (outside of Israel and

the United States) shared by both governments and news media. The

Palestinian opposition to the settlement is not based in the slightest on

"tradition" but on their perception of an Israeli intention to absorb this region

into the Jewish state.

After all, the basis of Zionism is to replace an Arab habitation in Palestine with

a majority of Jews. The stated policy of the Israeli government is to "Judaise"

Jerusalem.

The Group argued that to describe the Palestinian habitation of Jerusalem as

"traditional" was an inaccurate depiction of the political facts of the situation.

Radio New Zealand Ltd's Response to the Formal Complaint - 5 May 1997

RNZ noted that the exact wording of the passage concerned in the news item was:

...an Israeli decision to start a Jewish housing project in traditionally Arab

East Jerusalem...

It did not agree with the Group's interpretation of the words as conveying the

meaning that the Israeli government was building the settlement as a way of

overcoming traditional Arab exclusiveness and hostility against Jews, and could find

no support in any dictionary for the Group's interpretation of "traditionally". RNZ

believed the Group had made an individual interpretation of what the words meant, in

contrast to the obvious and straightforward meaning.

Declining to uphold the complaint, RNZ noted that the power to dismiss a formal

complaint as vexatious or one which ought not to be considered under all the

circumstances was reserved to the Broadcasting Standards Authority.

The Wellington Palestine Group's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards

Authority -29 May 1997

Dissatisfied with RNZ's response, the Group referred the complaint to the

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

The Group noted that the Shorter Oxford dictionary defined tradition as "statements,

beliefs and customs handed down by non written means from generation to

generation". It objected to the description of Palestinian land as "traditionally Arab

East Jerusalem".

It noted that Palestinian Arab sovereign ownership of East Jerusalem and the

Palestinian opposition to Jewish settlement was based not on tradition, but on

codified and explicit international law. It pointed out:

Apart from the United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338

requiring Israeli withdrawal from East Jerusalem, Palestinian claims against

Jewish settlements there are based on the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949

which states quite explicitly "the occupying power shall not deport or transfer

parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies."

The Group maintained that to call the Palestinian occupation of East Jerusalem

"traditional" was misleading. The Palestinians were there legally, the Israelis were not.

Therefore, it argued, the item was misleading, unbalanced, inaccurate and breached the

Radio Code of Practice.

The Group suggested that RNZ use the expression "occupied" when it referred to

those areas annexed in 1967.

RNZ's Response to the Authority - 5 June 1997

RNZ advised that it had nothing further to add except to draw the Authority's

attention to its s.11 power to dismiss a formal complaint.

No further comment was sought from the Wellington Palestine Group.