BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

News of the conflict in Ireland was covered in various reports on One Network News

on 5, 9, 12, 17 and 18 June 1997 between 6.00–7.00pm.

Mr Curran complained that TVNZ's coverage of Irish news was selective and biased

against the Republicans, and pointed out that early in the month of June, TVNZ had

failed to include major stories about Loyalist terrorism which had been covered by

other media in New Zealand, including the BBC news and local newspapers.

TVNZ denied the accusation of bias, explaining that its coverage of events in Ulster

was tailored for its New Zealand audience and therefore it did not present items in the

same depth as on the BBC news. One of the crucial considerations, it continued, was

whether the events being reported on would affect the peace process, and if there was

no indication that they would impact one way or the other, interest in the item was

diminished.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Mr Curran referred the complaint to the

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

requested that he be heard at a formal hearing.

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

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed the items complained about and have read

the correspondence (which is summarised in the Appendix). Although a formal

hearing was requested, on this occasion the Authority determines the complaint on the

basis of the extensive correspondence.

News items about civil unrest and conflict in Ireland were broadcast by Television

New Zealand Ltd on One Network News in various items on 5, 9, 12, 17 and 18 June

between 6.00–7.00pm. The items included reports of the trial in Britain of a man

charged with IRA terrorist bombing, the murder of a convicted Loyalist killer in

Belfast, the results of the Irish election, the seriousness of the drug problem in Dublin,

and the murders of two policemen in Northern Ireland.

Mr Curran of Levin complained that TVNZ was selective in its presentation of news

about Ireland, and revealed an apparent pro-Loyalist bias in its coverage. He cited a

number of examples by referring to same-day coverage of events in Ireland on the

BBC, National Radio and local and Irish newspapers. He noted that on 3 June the

BBC carried an item about the murder of an off-duty policeman by Loyalists in

Ulster. The story was also covered in some newspapers and by National Radio, but

was not reported on One Network News he said. Instead, on 5 June, it reported the

trial in Britain of a man charged with IRA terrorist bombing. Further, Mr Curran

argued, TVNZ did not cover the action taken by the Secretary of State for Northern

Ireland with respect to terrorism by Republicans and Loyalists, although the story

was reported in Wellington's Evening Post. Mr Curran described these as examples of

selective reporting which were in breach of standard G14.

Mr Curran referred to the murder of a convicted Loyalist killer which was reported on

the BBC at 7am on 12 June. He was described as being part of a gang of Loyalists who

in the 1970s murdered 19 Catholics. The reporter suggested that Republicans were

not involved in the killing and that it appeared two Loyalists were responsible. Mr

Currant noted that when the item was reported on One Network News that evening,

the number of Catholics murdered by the gang was given as 10 (instead of 19), and it

omitted to mention that Loyalists were suspected as being responsible for the murder.

In Mr Curran's view, this was a breach of standard G19 because it left viewers to

assume that IRA terrorists were responsible for another murder.

The BBC report on 10 June which commented on the new Irish government included

reactions from Lord Dudds, the British Minister in Northern Ireland, and the Rev Ian

Paisley. Mr Curran noted that TVNZ's report included only Mr Paisley's vitriolic

attack on the new Prime Minister, and did not include the conciliatory remarks of Lord

Dudds. In Mr Curran's view, the editing of the BBC report was an extraordinary

show of contempt for standards G14 and G19.

A newspaper report on 9 June referred to Ireland's booming economy under the

previous Irish government. That evening, Mr Curran observed, One Network News

screened a documentary on the shocking drug scene in Dublin and the murder there of

a journalist who had tried to investigate the drug problem. He maintained that TVNZ

deliberately chose to present only the worst possible images of Celtic/Catholic Irish

life while withholding the very positive news of Ireland's booming economy and the

appointment of President Robinson to a prestigious post at the United Nations.

In Mr Curran's view, these examples, and the failure of TVNZ to report the murder of

a policeman by Loyalists, demonstrated violations of standards G14 and G19 of the

Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. He requested that the Authority convene a

formal hearing to determine the matter.

TVNZ assessed the complaint under standards G14 and G19 of the Television Code

of Broadcasting Practice, which were nominated by Mr Curran. Those standards

pertain to News, Current Affairs and Documentaries and read:

G14  News must be presented accurately, objectively and impartially.

G19  Care must be taken in the editing of programme material to ensure that

the extracts used are a true reflection and not a distortion of the original

event or the overall views expressed.

First, TVNZ advised that it did not consider it valid for Mr Curran to compare the

way TVNZ covered Irish news with the BBC's coverage, pointing out that when

dealing with news of Northern Ireland, the BBC was dealing with what, for it, was

domestic news, and that items about the republic were about a close neighbour. In

New Zealand, it argued, news from both territories was foreign news of interest to

New Zealanders but not relevant in the same sense. It noted this approach had been

endorsed by the Authority in Decision Nos: 1996-121/122.

Secondly, TVNZ regarded Mr Curran's comparison of its news with newspaper

coverage as invalid, pointing out that newspapers had more space to devote to news

than did television news bulletins.

Thirdly, TVNZ asserted that it believed Mr Curran felt its coverage of events in

Ireland should be on the basis of a scorecard. In fact, TVNZ observed, its focus was

on the larger geopolitical trends, and a crucial consideration was how the event being

reported would affect the peace process.

TVNZ then turned to the particular items. With respect to its decision not to report

the murder of a policeman by Loyalists, TVNZ responded that in its judgment, the

murder had no impact on any major trends in Ireland, and was simply "more of the

same". On the other hand, its inclusion of the item about the IRA terrorist facing trial

on the British mainland was new because it was believed to be the first time a member

of the IRA had given evidence in a court there. It rejected the claim that its report

demonstrated "pro-Loyalist sentiment".

Turning to the commentary on the Irish election, TVNZ noted that the item came from

the BBC, and argued that it reflected the wider geopolitical view relevant to New

Zealanders. It submitted the report accurately described what happened in the

election, the possible consequences on the peace process and the frailty of the new

government.

The items on 17 and 18 June about Ireland's drug problem were, in TVNZ's view,

relevant because New Zealand and Ireland have similar populations and faced similar

social problems. On the other hand, it argued, the item on the booming Irish economy

had no relevance in New Zealand.

With respect to the report on the murder of a member of the Loyalist gang, TVNZ

acknowledged that while the BBC reporter spoke of a search being under way for two

loyalists, by the time TVNZ's report went to air 12 hours later, considerable

speculation and rumour meant that it was impossible to say who was responsible for

the killing. TVNZ described Mr Curran's assertion that the facts were distorted as

nonsense.

TVNZ concluded that there were no breaches of standards G14 and G19 in the

broadcasts. It noted that Mr Curran had not referred to items about Ireland carried on

either Midday or Tonight. It suggested that to ignore other news output when

considering the wider issue of balance invalidated Mr Curran's argument.

When he referred the complaint to the Authority, Mr Curran complained that TVNZ

had failed to address specific aspects of his complaint, in particular his assertion that

it had selectively edited the item about the general election because it emphasised Mr

Paisley's attack on the new Prime Minister, and omitted the favourable comments by

Lord Dudds. He rejected its assertion that the item broadcast was an accurate

description of what happened.

The Authority deals first with Mr Curran's request for a formal hearing. It

acknowledges his mistrust of TVNZ's editorial processes, and his accusations of pro-

Loyalist bias against TVNZ. In its considered view, the Authority decides that it has

before it sufficient material to determine the complaint about the trend of the

broadcasts cited in June without a formal hearing. It notes that although Mr Curran

wished to introduce evidence supporting his allegations about previous breaches of the

Code of Practice by TVNZ, the Authority is bound to confine its deliberations to the

items complained about which are the subject of this formal complaint. While it

understands Mr Curran's contention that the items identified by him in June were in

his view but symptomatic of an ongoing problem with TVNZ's coverage of Irish

issues, it advises that it did not watch the tape provided by him because it is outside

the parameters of his specific complaints. Its decision is confined to the matters

described above.

From the examples Mr Curran has cited of the coverage of Irish issues in June, the

Authority is left with an overall impression of some incomplete reporting of Irish

domestic news. It considers that TVNZ has a responsibility to ensure that it cannot

be accused of being partisan in its coverage of any news, and reminds it of the need to

check that its sources are reliable and objective, and that its own editing practices do

not result in a lack of balance as [carelessness or] lack of attention to the overall

impressions created by news selection decisions could result in a breach of

broadcasting standards.

While the Authority considers that Mr Curran makes a valid point in drawing to the

network's attention the need to ensure that balance is achieved in its reporting of Irish

news, it also acknowledges the real difficulties inherent in reporting news which is not

of central interest to the majority of New Zealanders. It understands that Mr Curran

has a particular interest in Irish news, and his level of knowledge is enhanced by his

newspaper reading and by the BBC's coverage. The Authority recognises that that

degree of interest is not shared by most in New Zealand, and that TVNZ has

obligations to its viewers to present a variety of items of interest in its news

programmes. Nevertheless, it draws to TVNZ's attention the need to ensure that it

cannot be charged with political bias. The Authority concludes that, given the ongoing

coverage of issues pertaining to Ireland and the narrow focus of Mr Curran's

complaint, it is not prepared to find a breach of broadcasting standards on this

occasion.

An accusation of deliberate bias in media coverage is one that the Authority views as

extremely serious. It could not be upheld without clear evidence. While Mr Curran's

submitted material might well have supported his claim of bias to a degree, it is

impossible to evaluate in isolation from other material which might have been

broadcast on the network within the same period, in the same subject area, and which

was not included. It is not the Authority's role to question the news judgment of

broadcasters, or their bulletin compilation. However, if it is drawn to its attention that

there is a deliberate policy of suppression of significant viewpoints in controversial

matters, that would be cause for grave concern. The Authority is not convinced that –

on the grounds of what Mr Curran has submitted – there has been such a deliberate

policy. However, it reminds the network that it has a duty to ensure the integrity of

its news sources and ongoing balance in broadcast news.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
25 September 1997

Appendix

Mr Curran's Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd - 20 June 1997

Various news items on One Network News on 5, 9, 12, 17 and 18 June 1997 dealt with

civil unrest and conflict in Ireland.

Mr Patrick Curran of Levin noted that the coverage on 17 June of the news that two

policemen had been murdered by IRA terrorists was identical to the coverage seen

earlier that day on the BBC World News. He commended TVNZ for that report.

However, he noted, on 3 June, the BBC carried an item about the murder of an off-

duty policeman by Loyalists in Ulster. National Radio and some newspapers also

carried the story, but One Network News did not. Nor did it report the account of the

action of the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in response to terrorism by

Republicans and Loyalists over the past year. He continued:

Earlier than 4 June, the BBC carried more information about the murder of the

policeman by Loyalists and a relatively long item about the outlawing of the

Republican and Loyalist terror groups.

Again ONE 6pm remained silent, but the following evening without a blush

told of a trial in Britain of a man charged with IRA terrorist bombing.

On 12 June, Mr Curran noted that the BBC reported the murder in Belfast of a

member of a Loyalist gang who in the 1970s murdered 19 Catholics. The report stated

that initially the Loyalists blamed the IRA, but later accepted that Republicans were

not involved and the police were looking for two Loyalists in connection with the

murder. That evening, Mr Curran continued, TVNZ reported the murder, giving the

tally of Catholics murdered by the Loyalist gang as 10. It also omitted to mention that

there was a real possibility that Loyalists were the killers.

Mr Curran regarded this as a breach of standard G19 because it distorted the original

event, and would have led people to believe that IRA terrorists were responsible for

yet another murder.

Mr Curran cited another example of distortion of the facts:

Following the election of a new Irish government on 6 June, the BBC asked

two leading figures in the province, Lord Dudds, the British minister in

Northern Ireland and the Rev Ian Paisley for their reaction to the new

government under Prime Minister elect Mr Ahern (BBC June 10).

Lord Dudds made it very plain that he welcomed the new administration,

seeing no problems whatsoever in the context of Northern Ireland affairs.

Ian Paisley reacted with a vitriolic attack on Mr Ahern, accusing him of doing a

"dirty deal" with the IRA/Sinn Fein.

One 6pm plucked the Paisley attack out of the BBC item, ignoring the Lord

Dudds interview. Again a violation of Code 19.

Mr Curran also pointed out that a week or so before the Irish election, the BBC had

broadcast a documentary on the booming Irish economy. He complained that TVNZ,

instead of referring to Ireland's booming economy, screened a story of the drug

problem in Dublin and the murder there of a woman journalist who had dared to

investigate Ireland's drug scourge.

In Mr Curran's view, TVNZ presented only the worst possible images of

Celtic/Catholic Irish life, Irish terrorism, the murders of two policemen in Northern

Ireland and the drug commentary, while withholding the positive news of Ireland's

booming economy and the appointment of President Robinson to the post of UN

Commissioner of Human Rights.

In his view, standards G14 and G19 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice

were breached.

Mr Curran appended several news clippings which illustrated his points.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint - 3 July 1997

TVNZ began by reiterating points it had made to Mr Curran in previous complaints:

that it was not valid to compare the way TVNZ covered Irish news with the way the

BBC covered them. It reminded him that the BBC was covering matters which for it

were domestic issues, whereas for TVNZ they were foreign news items.

TVNZ considered Mr Curran's comparison of the newspaper coverage of the items as

invalid, pointing out that newspapers had many more column inches available than did

any television news bulletin.

It also considered that Mr Curran believed that its coverage of events in Ireland should

almost be on the basis of a scorecard. In fact, TVNZ continued, it looked at larger

geopolitical trends, adding:

At present, for instance a crucial consideration when an event occurs in

Northern Ireland is how that event will affect the peace process. If there is no

indication that it will impact one way or the other, interest in the item is

diminished.

With respect to the programme on 5 June, TVNZ responded that the murder of the

policeman had no impact on any major trends in Northern Ireland and was just "more

of the same". On the other hand, the item about the trial in Britain of a man charged

with IRA terrorist bombing was something new, because it was believed to be the first

time a member of the IRA had given evidence on the mainland.

On 9 June, the item on the result of the Irish election came from the BBC - which

TVNZ noted, Mr Curran held as a paragon of Irish coverage. It referred to the

introduction to the item, which it considered properly reflected the possible

consequences of the peace process and was an accurate description of what happened.

With respect to the criticism that it carried the drug item, while failing to mention the

booming economy, TVNZ explained that it contained a cautionary message which was

valid in New Zealand which has a similar population as Ireland. On the other hand,

TVNZ observed, the item on the Irish economy had no relevance here, and besides the

programme to which Mr Curran referred was a full-length documentary.

Turning to the 10 June item which omitted to mention that Loyalists were being

sought in connection with the murder of the gang member, TVNZ acknowledged that

although the BBC report referred to the Loyalists, the TVNZ broadcast was 12 hours

later and by then it was clear that the killing was surrounded by speculation and

rumour. It was impossible to say who was responsible for the killing.

TVNZ noted that Mr Curran approved its reporting of the murder on 17 June of two

Ulster policemen.

It concluded that there was no breach of standards in the broadcasts cited. It also

noted that Mr Curran had not referred to items about Ireland or Northern Ireland in its

other news programmes. It considered these should be considered as part of the One

Network News output.

Mr Curran's Referral to the Authority - 8 July 1997

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's decision, Mr Curran referred the complaint to the

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

In Mr Curran's view, there was little value in referring the complaint unless the

Authority held a formal hearing under oath. He added that he had very good reasons

to request a formal hearing.

The complaint, he continued, was about TVNZ's honesty, or to be more precise, its

dishonesty, in dealing with Irish news. He referred to previous correspondence with

TVNZ about this matter and earlier news items.

To TVNZ's claim that it did not report the murder of a policeman by Loyalists

because it was simply "more of the same", Mr Curran responded that was nonsense,

and enclosed a copy of a newspaper article about the incident.

He referred to other matters which were outside of the formal complaint before

concluding with another plea that he be allowed a formal hearing.

In a second letter, dated 16 July, Mr Curran referred the complaint formally to the

Authority. He again expressed his preference for a formal hearing.

Referring first to TVNZ's argument that the BBC presented a British view of the

events in Ireland, Mr Curran responded that nevertheless, the decision to use the items

in its news brought a responsibility to ensure that it reflected the same degree of

balance as the original.

Mr Curran rejected the suggestion that he believed the television news should be as

extensive as newspaper coverage. He emphasised that he only sought balance.

Regarding TVNZ's argument that withholding the news of the murder of a policeman

by Loyalists because it was just more of the same, Mr Curran responded that it was

news because it was in fact a frightening new dimension in the conflict, as his

accompanying newspaper articles illustrated.

Mr Curran took issue with TVNZ's explanation as to why it omitted to include the

fact that Loyalists were being sought in connection with a murder.

In Mr Curran's view, one of the most distorted items was how TVNZ handled the

interviews of Lord Dudds and the Rev Ian Paisley. He noted that TVNZ did not

respond to this criticism.

Mr Curran noted that on 7, 8 and 9 July TVNZ presented particularly emotive images

of Catholic rioters battling in Northern Ireland. Yet on 8 June, he pointed out, when

Protestant rioters battled with police who were trying to prevent the burning of yet

another Catholic church, no television coverage was given. Mr Curran provided

newspaper stories about these incidents.

Mr Curran asked the Authority to examine what he wrote in his letter of 20 June

regarding the Irish election, and TVNZ's reply. He claimed that TVNZ changed the

whole thrust of the complaint. He concluded:

If you were to ask TVNZ for a video recording of what it broadcast that

evening of 9 June - the news item on the result of the Irish election and the

"Close Up" commentary on it afterwards - it would be patently clear that the

above claim [that TVNZ accurately described what was happening] is, at best,

grossly misleading.

He repeated his request for a hearing.

Further Correspondence

In a letter dated 22 July 1997, TVNZ responded to Mr Curran's request for a formal

hearing.

It advised that it saw no reason why the Authority should depart from its normal

practice and determine the complaints on the basis of the paperwork provided. It

suggested that the volume of complaints dealt with by the Authority made it

impractical and undesirable to hold formal hearings.

TVNZ considered the specifics of Mr Curran's complaint seemed quite

straightforward.

It noted that Mr Curran's letter of 8 July suggested that he wished to use the occasion

of a formal hearing to engage in a wide-reaching review of New Zealand's coverage of

events in Northern Ireland over a long period of time.

In TVNZ's view, a hearing would achieve nothing that could not be achieved through

the normal complaints process. It concluded:

We observe that the Authority has in recent times had before it a number of

extremely complex complaints yet has not felt it necessary to convene formal

hearings to determine them.

In a letter dated 22 July 1997, Mr Curran elaborated further on his reasons for

requesting a hearing. He considered that TVNZ had little regard for absolute truth and

fair play in its coverage of Irish news. He enclosed a video tape and some

correspondence to illustrate what he meant. The information was intended for the

Authority's background knowledge and understanding.

He then analysed some news items of 1993 and the correspondence which he had with

TVNZ at that time.

TVNZ's Response to the Authority - 28 July 1997

TVNZ advised that it had no further comment to make on the complaint. It noted that

the arguments advanced by Mr Curran amounted to restatements of positions which

had been placed before the Authority a number of times in recent years.

It concluded:

Suffice here only to say that Mr Curran is mistaken in his apparent

assumption that TVNZ is somehow involved in a deliberate campaign to

distort news coverage of events in Ulster and the Republic of Ireland.

Further Correspondence

In a letter dated 31 July, Mr Curran sought a copy of the tape which TVNZ provided

the Authority. In his view it was vital that he see it in order to determine whether it

was a faithful copy of the news broadcasts he complained about.

In a further letter of 26 August, Mr Curran cited, as another example of the type of

coverage he was complaining about, a report on Holmes on 22 August concerning

Danny Butler, an Irish refugee in New Zealand. He noted that Mr Butler's brother

had been murdered in Ireland in 1993 by Loyalists but that the item claimed that if

Danny Butler were to be sent back to Ireland he would surely be killed by a

Republican group. Mr Curran concluded:

Is it any wonder that Holmes last Friday and Mark Sainsbury [the reporter]

kept quiet about that Butler tragedy, for the simple fact is that the current

affairs journalists on Holmes, Assignment (July 3) and 60 Minutes (February 2)

act as though all terrorist organisations in Ulster stem from the Catholic side of

the sectarian fence.

In closing he referred to a letter written to him by TVNZ in 1995 in which it stated it

was not prepared to say that its news output was neutral, but that its aim was to be

impartial and objective.

Mr Curran provided a newspaper article which showed that the blame for the terrorist

death toll for 1993 (in which 83 people were killed) was shared by the IRA and the

UFF and others.