BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary  

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

The Authority did not uphold a complaint a reference to ‘Māori currently waiting 12 months longer than others for surgery’ in the introduction of a 1 News item breached the accuracy, discrimination and denigration, and fairness standards. The Authority accepted the reference was inaccurate, as it should have said ‘Māori were more likely than others to be waiting 12 months for surgery’ (not waiting 12 months longer). However, the Authority found the inaccuracy was not material, given the item’s focus on the pressures on the health system, potential negative outcomes of long waiting times, and the Planned Care Taskforce’s recommendations to reduce waiting times. In this context, the brief reference to Māori wait times in the introduction was unlikely to significantly affect viewers’ understanding of the item as a whole. The discrimination and denigration and fairness standards did not apply.

Not Upheld: Accuracy, Discrimination and Denigration, Fairness

The broadcast

[1]  An item on 1 News, broadcast on 25 October 2022, discussed the ongoing pressure on the health system and the Government’s plan to reduce hospital waiting times. The report noted waiting lists, and waiting times, have grown considerably since before the COVID-19 pandemic. The item was introduced as follows:

As our health system remains under pressure, the Government's unveiled its plan to reduce hospital waiting lists across the country. Among the 101 recommendations, cutting back on unnecessary follow‑up appointments to free up first appointments for others, improving regional cooperation, and, getting rid of targets which are described as a distraction. Let's take a look at the current wait times. In August, nearly 35,000 people had been waiting longer than four months for their first appointment with a specialist. That's more than twice the number waiting before the COVID pandemic hit. Nearly five-and-a-half thousand people were having to wait longer than a year, with Māori currently waiting 12 months longer than others for surgery. It comes as a letter leaked to 1 News shows doctors in the Bay of Plenty have warned some patients are choosing to die because of obstacles in accessing potentially life-maintaining treatment.

[2]  The report included discussion:

• On the letter, which stated patients were being diagnosed with bowel cancer having been on waitlists for months longer than recommended times, leading to palliative care rather than curative treatment plans. It included responses from Margie Apa (Health NZ | Te Whatu Ora Chief Executive) and Hon Andrew Little (who was unaware of the letter).
• Of the Planned Care Taskforce’s recommendations to reduce waiting lists, including reducing ‘unnecessary follow-up appointments’ and its omission of including targets. Dr Vanessa Blair, from the Association of General Surgeons, and the leader of the National Party, Christopher Luxon, both commented on the recommendations / omission of target times (which they considered were necessary, not a ‘distraction’).
• From members of the public regarding their perspective of waitlist times and potential negative outcomes for people waiting.

The complaint

[3]  Lee Higgins complained the broadcast breached the discrimination and denigration, accuracy and fairness standards of the Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, stating:

• The item promoted ‘racism with untrue statements that unfairly portray waiting lists for hospital admissions [are] longer for Māori than for non-Māori’.
• The report should have said Māori were more likely than others to be waiting longer than 12 months for surgery, not ‘that they were waiting 12 months longer than others’.
• This was ‘one instance of inflammatory reporting wherein [Māori] are portrayed as being unfairly treated.’

The broadcaster’s response

[4]  TVNZ noted the Planned Care Taskforce’s report on which the information was based found:¹

There has been an inequitable increase in patients waiting more than 12 months with a 53% increase in the number of Māori waiting more than 12 months compared to 49% for all populations and 20% for Pacific.

[5]  On this basis TVNZ acknowledged:

…the reference to Māori waiting times could have been framed with greater precision.

The report should have said that Māori were more likely than others to be waiting longer than 12 months for surgery, not that they were waiting 12 months longer than others.

[6]  However, TVNZ did not uphold the complaint as a breach of the accuracy standard because it considered the above distinction was not material in the context of the story and did not materially mislead the audience: ‘The Planned Care Taskforce had identified an inequitable increase in Māori patients waiting more than 12 months for surgery, and this was an important issue that 1 News was justified in reporting.’

[7]  In response to other standards raised, TVNZ noted:

• Discrimination and Denigration: The complainant has not ‘identified a section of the community’ that the broadcast discriminated against or denigrated. For completeness, ‘identifying an inequity experienced by one section of the community does not amount to discrimination against, or denigration of, other sections of the community.’
• Fairness: The complainant did not identify a person or organisation they believed was dealt with unfairly in the broadcast.

The relevant standard

[8]  We consider the complainant’s concerns are best addressed under the accuracy standard, and have focused our decision accordingly. The purpose of the accuracy standard² is to protect the public from being significantly misinformed.³ 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. To ‘mislead’ means ‘to give another a wrong idea or impression of the facts’.⁴ Where a material error of fact has occurred, broadcasters should correct it within a reasonable period after they have been put on notice.

[9]  We deal with the remaining standards briefly at paragraph [17].

Our analysis

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

[11]  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, and the value and public interest in the broadcast, against any harm potentially caused by the broadcast. We may only intervene and uphold a complaint where the level of harm means limiting the right to freedom of expression is reasonable and justified in a free and democratic society.⁵

Accuracy

[12]  Having regard to TVNZ’s submissions and the source provided for the statement complained about, we accept that the phrasing of the statement was inaccurate. The report relied on did not state that Māori were waiting 12 months longer than others, but rather that they were more likely to be waiting more than 12 months for their treatment than other population groups.

[13]  So the question for the Authority was whether in the context that inaccuracy was ‘material’. This is because the standard is concerned only with ‘material points of fact’. Technical or other points unlikely to significantly affect viewers’ understanding of the programme as a whole are not considered material.⁶

[14]  The Authority has previously acknowledged the importance of accuracy regarding statistics and figures, particularly when they are used to pique viewers’ interest.⁷ We acknowledge the complainant’s concerns in this respect.

[15]  However, taking the item as a whole, we reached the conclusion the phrasing would not have significantly affected viewers’ understanding of the issues highlighted and therefore was not material in the context. The factors supporting this view were:

• The majority of the item focused on pressures on the health system, potential negative outcomes of long wait times (for example people receiving palliative care rather than curative treatment) and the Government’s plans to address the issue, based on the Planned Care Taskforce’s recommendations.
• The comments included from interviewees in the item focused in particular on cutting back on follow-up appointments, and whether or not waitlist ‘targets’ were useful or should be implemented.
• Current wait times for Māori, or any group of people, were only mentioned once in the introduction to the item.
• The inaccuracy was not repeated later in the broadcast.

[16]  We therefore find no breach of the accuracy standard.

Remaining standards

[17]  We consider the remaining standards raised in the complaint did not apply in the circumstances:

• Discrimination and Denigration:⁸ This standard only applies to broadcasts directed at ‘recognised sections of the community’. The complainant did not identify any section of the community that was denigrated or discriminated against, saying only that the broadcast ‘promoted racism’. In any event, we note the importance of freedom of expression means a high level of condemnation, with an element of malice or nastiness, is usually necessary to find a breach of the standard. Neither the news item nor the statement complained about carried any element of condemnation or malice.⁹
• Fairness:¹⁰ We understand the complainant’s key concern under this standard to be that the broadcast inaccurately portrayed unfair treatment towards Māori. The fairness standard requires broadcasters to deal fairly with any individual or organisation referred to in a broadcast; it is not directed at addressing whether facts are ‘fairly’ or misleadingly conveyed (which is better addressed under the accuracy standard, dealt with above).¹¹

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

Susie Staley
Chair
12 April 2023    

Appendix

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

1  Lee Higgins’s formal complaint to TVNZ – 25 October 2022

2  TVNZ’s decision on the complaint – 16 December 2022

3  Higgins’s referral to the Authority – 7 January 2023

4  TVNZ confirming no further comments – 31 January 2023

¹ Citing Te Whatu Ora | Health New Zealand Planned Care Taskforce: Reset and Restore Plan (2 September 2022) at page 19
² Standard 6, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
³ Commentary, Standard 6, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 16
⁴ Attorney General of Samoa v TVWorks Ltd [2012] NZHC 131, [2012] NZAR 407 at [98]
⁵ Introduction, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 4
⁶ Guideline 6.2
⁷ See Gibb and Television New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2022-102 at [14]
⁸ Standard 4, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁹ Guideline 4.1
¹⁰ Standard 8, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
¹¹ See Chapman and Television New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2022-108 at [24] for a similar finding