BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary  

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

The Authority has not upheld a complaint that a 1 News segment on the Military’s bid to replace two 757 planes breached broadcasting standards. The complainant alleged statements – linking Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern ‘hitching a ride’ on the Canadian Prime Minister’s VIP plane, with the ability and age of the Air Force’s 757s – breached the accuracy, balance, and fairness standards, due to the failure to include the Prime Minister’s full statement on why she caught the flight. The Authority found the broadcast was materially accurate, and the balance standard did not apply as the complainant’s concerns did not relate to a controversial issue of public importance. The broadcast was not unfair to Ardern. 

Not Upheld: Accuracy, Balance, Fairness

The broadcast

[1]  An episode of 1 News, broadcast on 23 October 2022, discussed the Air Force’s bid to replace two 757 planes. The segment contained the following dialogue:

Host:                         Work is underway to replace two aging Air Force planes used to transport VIPs and freight. It comes as the Prime Minister had to hitch a ride from the Queen's funeral to a world leaders’ meeting in New York. Political Editor Jessica Mutch McKay sat down with the head of the Air Force.

Jessica Mutch Mckay: World leaders flooded to London to remember the Queen. But when it was time to fly out, Jacinda Ardern hitched a ride with the Canadian Prime Minister. The trip, a bit much for our Air Force's aging 757.

Jacinda Ardern:      There was a way we could reduce a bit of cost. He was heading in the same direction. It just made sense.

Wayne Mapp (Former Defence Force Minister): Kind of looks a little bit shonky, but it's practical and it worked in the circumstances and I guess it reflects we're a bit smaller than Australia and Canada.

Mutch McKay:         The Australian delegation used its VIP plane to get to the funeral with enough space for its prime minister and dignitaries. But our plane can only go as far as Bali before needing to refuel, which means it would take days to get to Europe. Plus, at 30 years old, there's the risk of it breaking down. When you see all the planes lined up ours looks like a bit of a dunger.

Andrew Clark (Chief of Airforce): What makes you say that? [laughter]

Mapp:                       It’s just too old. It’s like having a 30 year old car.

Mutch McKay:         It's not just for Prime Ministerial trips to the White House. It's used to transport troops, most recently to train Ukrainian soldiers, visits to Antarctica, and for freight in the Pacific.

Clark:                       You're probably not going to get the one magic machine that can do all of those and tick all of those boxes.

Mutch McKay:         The Chief of the Air Force is putting together a case to replace our two 757s with something new or second hand.

Clark:                       Everybody wants to operate new stuff. But having said that, there's a lot of affection out there amongst our air crews for some of our oldest airplanes.

Mutch McKay:         But it's also a struggle to keep pilots.

Clark:                       Our remuneration is definitely out of kilter, and it’s not competitive now with the market outside the NZDF.

Mutch McKay:         Lured away by more money and newer aircraft.

The complaint

[2]  Debbie Erickson complained the broadcast breached the accuracy, balance and fairness standards of the Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand.

Accuracy

[3]  Erickson complained the broadcast inaccurately associated issues with the Air Force’s 757 planes with Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern flying to New York on Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s plane. Erickson quoted Ardern, who, three days before the broadcast, stated¹:

[The 757 planes weren’t] the basis of that event, it wasn't actually anything to do with the 757s, we never use the 757s for that particular trip, it was simply a matter of convenience. There was a way we could reduce a bit of cost. He was heading in the same direction, it just made sense.

Balance

[4]  Erickson alleged the failure to include all of the Prime Minister’s statement in the broadcast watered down the balance the full statement would have provided, and left the audience ‘significantly misinformed’.

Fairness

[5]  Erickson stated ‘The news item was unfair to the PM because while she was given a reasonable opportunity to comment, her comments were not adequately presented in the programme.’

Response to TVNZ’s submission the complaint should be declined to be determined

[6]  Erickson considered TVNZ was defending ‘presenters who continue with their blatant bias towards the national party’ and showed misogyny and disrespect towards our Prime Minister.

The broadcaster’s response

[7]  TVNZ did not uphold the complaint for the following reasons:

Accuracy

• ‘Jacinda Ardern’s position on the decision not to use the 757 was accurately conveyed in the 1 News item. She is heard saying: there was a way we could reduce a bit of cost, he was heading in the same direction, it just made sense. This clearly indicates to the viewer that for the Prime Minister the reason was not the reliability of the planes, but a cost decision. However, [TVNZ] also notes that the Prime Minister’s earlier statement that we never use the 757s for that particular trip, also signals that there may be other reasons at play for the plane not being used, such as length of time the plane takes, the need to refuel and the unreliability of the planes.’
• There has been ‘no complaint or concern raised by any Defence officials or anyone from the PM’s office over the story because it was accurate.’

Balance

• ‘The issue complained of, the statement the PM had to “hitch a ride” with the Canadian PM because the NZ 757s were unable to be used for the trip is not a controversial issue of public importance, which [would have] “a significant impact, or be of concern to, members of the New Zealand public”.’’
• Further balance was provided in having statements included from the Wayne Mapp (former Defence Minister), Air Vice Marshall Andrew Clark (Chief of Air Force), and the Political Editor Jessica Mutch-McKay.

Fairness

• TVNZ disagreed the broadcast was unfair to Ardern, as ‘the nub’ of the PM’s statement was included, which ‘clearly indicates to a viewer that for the Prime Minister a main reason that the 757 was not used was not the reliability of the planes, but a cost decision.’
• TVNZ also noted the BSA’s guidance that the threshold for finding a breach of the fairness standard in relation to politicians and public figures is higher than for someone unfamiliar with the media… ‘In this case Ms Ardern was not questioned aggressively, or criticised. The discussion focused solely on the reliability of the 757s and whether they are fit for purpose, or whether they should be replaced. Jacinda Ardern was given opportunity in the programme to put her position across.’
• ‘It is important the state of the New Zealand Air Force fleet can be interrogated, and given the reliability issues which seem to be associated with the planes, it is in the public good to do so.’

[8]  TVNZ also noted the complainant’s basis for referring the complaint to the BSA was ‘Jacinda explained her reasons but TVNZ would not accept it.’ TVNZ stated:

It is the accepted role of news media to report what has occurred and what was said, which occurred in this news bulletin, with Ms Ardern’s statement about the use of the 757 included in the story. The right of news media to provide analysis and report other viewpoints from those in power is of fundamental importance in a democratic society and is protected by the Bill of Rights Act 1990. The complaint which Ms Erickson originally supplied centred on the editing of the quote from Ms Ardern, and the Political Editors analysis of the incident rather than that 1 News 'not accepting Ms Ardern's reasons' without questions.

[9]  TVNZ also requested the Authority decline to determine the complaint for reasons outlined below.

Preliminary issue – request to decline to determine

[10]  This complaint is part of a group of complaints that were referred to the Authority in a similar manner. TVNZ has requested the Authority decline to determine these complaints on the basis they are frivolous, vexatious or trivial (or otherwise should not be determined by the Authority):

The complaints in question here arose from a public Facebook page administered by a person who has not made a formal complaint themselves, encouraging their followers to make formal complaints…They also encouraged followers to directly contact the specific reporters, providing the reporters' work emails…

The publicly stated purpose of doing this was to 'put pressure on journalists'

[11]  This issue was considered in detail in another recent Authority decision, to which Erickson and TVNZ were parties.² The complainant’s and the broadcaster’s full submissions on this matter, along with our decision on the issue, are outlined in that decision. In summary, we do not consider the templated and ‘en masse’ manner in which the complaints, including this one, were submitted is, in itself, grounds to decline to determine the complaints. We therefore go on to consider the substantive complaint. 

The standards

[12]  The purpose of the accuracy standard³ is to protect the public from being significantly misinformed.⁴ 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. Where a material error of fact has occurred, broadcasters should correct it within a reasonable period after they have been put on notice.

[13]  The balance standard⁵ ensures competing viewpoints about significant issues are presented to enable the audience to arrive at an informed and reasoned opinion.⁶

[14]  The purpose of the fairness standard⁷ is to protect the dignity and reputation of those featured in programmes.⁸

Our analysis

[15]  We have watched the broadcast and read the correspondence listed in the Appendix.

[16]  As a starting point, we considered the right to freedom of expression. It is our role to weigh up the right to freedom of expression against any harm potentially caused by the broadcast. We may only intervene when the limitation on the right to freedom of expression is demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.⁹

[17]  The harm alleged by the complainant is that people may have been misled as to why Ardern “hitched” a ride to New York with Trudeau – by the association of that event with aircraft performance issues – and because Ardern’s statement had been edited down in the broadcast ‘removing balance’.

[18]  The broadcast in this case carried significant public interest. It discussed the Military’s bid for the replacement of two planes, which is estimated to cost the Government between $350 million and $600 million.¹⁰ This amount of Government spending (particularly in a cost of living crisis) is important to New Zealanders. The value of this broadcast means we would require a correspondingly high level of potential harm to justify restriction of the broadcaster’s freedom of expression. For the reasons outlined below, we have identified no potential harm reaching such a threshold.

Accuracy

[19]  The complaint under this standard is that the broadcast misled the audience as to Ardern’s reason for catching a flight with Trudeau, and inaccurately associated that decision with the age and capabilities of the Air Force’s 757 planes.

[20]  The standard is concerned only with material inaccuracies. Technical or unimportant points that are unlikely to significantly affect viewers’ understanding of the programme as a whole are not considered material.¹¹

[21]  In our view, the broadcast as a whole focused on the Air Force’s bid to replace its two 757s due to their age, reliability and capability. The statements about Ardern’s trip to London and then New York were used as an example of what the 757s are unable to do (as they require multiple days to travel that far, and have a history of break downs).¹² Whether or not the ability of the 757s to complete the trip was the reason for Ardern “hitching” a ride with Trudeau is immaterial to this understanding of the broadcast. In this context, the inclusion of Ardern’s full statement that they “do not use the 757s for that particular trip”, would not have changed the audience’s understanding of the broadcast as a whole.

[22]  In addition to our finding above, we consider the inclusion of Ardern’s statement “There was a way we could reduce a bit of cost, and we were headed in the same direction. It just made sense” provided the audience with sufficient information to understand Ardern’s own reasoning on the point, mitigating any risk of the audience being misled.

[23]  In these circumstances, we have not found harm at a level justifying regulatory intervention in this case, and do not uphold this complaint under the accuracy standard.

Balance

[24]  The complainant’s concerns under the balance standard are that the audience was not provided Ardern’s full statement, including her explanation the “757s are not used for that particular trip”.

[25]  The balance standard requires broadcasters to present significant viewpoints when controversial issues of public importance are discussed during news or current affairs programmes.¹³

[26]  The Authority has typically defined an issue of public importance as something that would have ‘significant potential impact on, or be of concern to, members of the New Zealand public.’ A controversial issue is one which has topical currency and excites conflicting opinion or about which there has been ongoing public debate.¹⁴

[27]  While we accept the Military’s bid to replace the two 757’s might constitute a controversial issue of public importance (given the costs noted at [18]), the complainant’s concerns do not relate to the omission of any specific perspective on that issue but to the omission of information concerning Ardern’s reasons for travelling with Trudeau.

[28]  The reason for that decision is not an issue of public importance which is likely to significantly impact, or be of concern to New Zealanders. In addition, as outlined above, we consider Ardern’s perspective on why she “hitched” a ride with Trudeau was adequately provided for in the short statement included in the broadcast.

[29]  For the above reasons, we do not uphold the complaint under the balance standard.

Fairness

[30]  The purpose of the fairness standard¹⁵ is to protect the dignity and reputation of those featured in programmes.¹⁶ As TVNZ identified in its decision, the Authority has consistently held that the threshold for finding a breach of the fairness standard in relation to politicians and public figures is higher than for someone unfamiliar with the media.¹⁷ Politicians and public figures hold a position in society where robust questioning and scrutiny of their policy, roles, and behaviour is encouraged and expected.

[31]  This broadcast did not approach the threshold required for our intervention:

• It did not go beyond the usual scrutiny that could reasonably be expected of a news and current affairs segment. There was no sign of ‘misogyny and disrespect’ towards the Prime Minister.
• While the broadcast did not include the full statement from Ardern’s interview a few days prior, it did include a portion of her statement, allowing Ardern’s key reason for travelling with Trudeau to be voiced.
• The segment would not have left the audience with an unduly negative opinion of the Prime Minister. Ardern was depicted as taking a practical step to save costs.

[32]  For the above reasons we do not uphold the complaint under the fairness standard.

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

Susie Staley
Chair
7 March 2023   

Appendix

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

1  Debbie Erickson’s formal complaint to TVNZ – 24 October 2022

2  TVNZ’s response to the complaint – 18 November 2022

3  Erickson’s referral to the Authority – 18 November 2022

4  TVNZ’s further comments – 5 December 2022

5  Erickson’s further comments – 12 December 2022

6  TVNZ’s confirmation of no further comments – 18 January 2023

¹ 1 News “Live: Ardern speaks after meeting with new Auckland mayor Wayne Brown” Facebook <facebook.com>
² See Dobson & Erickson and Television New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2022-121
³ Standard 6, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁴ Commentary, Standard 6, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 16
⁵ Standard 5, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁶ Commentary, Standard 5, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 14
⁷ Standard 8, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁸ Commentary, Standard 8, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 20
⁹ Introduction, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 4
¹⁰ “Call for fault-prone Air Force 757s to be replaced earlier” 1 News (online ed, 8 July 2022)
¹¹ Guideline 6.2
¹² See: New Zealand Defence Force l Te Ope Kātua o Aotearoa “Boeing 757-272” <nzdf.mil.nz>; “Call for fault-prone Air Force 757s to be replaced earlier” 1 News (online ed, 8 July 2022); Isaac Davison “Embarrassing Air Force breakdown reignites calls for new planes and an end to VIP transport” New Zealand Herald (online ed, 25 October 2016); Dan Lake “Inside the RNZAF Boeing 757 used by Jacinda Ardern” Newshub (11 November 2021)
¹³ Standard 5, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
¹⁴ Guideline 5.1
¹⁵ Standard 8, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
¹⁶ Commentary, Standard 8, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 20
¹⁷ Guideline 8.1