Judge and Discovery NZ Ltd - 2023-021 (14 June 2023)
Members
- Susie Staley MNZM (Chair)
- John Gillespie
- Tupe Solomon-Tanoa’i
- Aroha Beck
Dated
Complainant
- Paul Judge
Number
2023-021
Programme
Newshub Live at 6pmBroadcaster
Discovery NZ Ltd T/A Warner Bros. DiscoveryChannel/Station
ThreeStandards
Summary
[This summary does not form part of the decision.]
The Authority has not upheld a complaint an item on Newshub Live at 6pm breached the balance standard. The broadcast commented on Chris Hipkins’s first day as Prime Minister, and noted after only a few hours into the role, he did not have any ‘tangible’ policy to announce. The complainant alleged the broadcasting was biased, and unbalanced. The Authority did not uphold the complaint, finding the balance standard did not apply as the broadcast did not discuss an issue of public importance, the complainant did not specify which balancing perspectives they considered were not presented, and in any event, relevant perspectives had been presented in the broadcast.
Not Upheld: Balance
The broadcast
[1] On 25 January 2023, during a segment of Newshub Live at 6pm, Political Editor Jenna Lynch discussed that morning’s media briefing with newly appointed Prime Minister Chris Hipkins. The segment included clips of Hipkins being sworn into office; short clips from the briefing; and commentary and analysis from Lynch. In the introduction, host Samantha Hayes stated:
And today [Chris Hipkins] held his first cabinet meeting. But as Political Editor Jenna Lynch reports, he had nothing tangible to offer the public.
[2] The broadcast showed several clips of questions put to the Prime Minister related to policy, which Hipkins responded to by stating multiple times that he would not be making policy announcements ‘only a couple of hours into the job’. These clips included Lynch’s statement:
Until Hipkins has shuffled his deck – he’ll appoint Ministers next week – he’s stuck in policy paralysis.
[3] On being asked by host Mike McRoberts why Hipkins had not yet announced new policy, Lynch advised:
It's a sequencing thing, apparently. He wants his new team in place so that new Ministers can own the reset. For instance, a new Broadcasting Minister can more easily scrap a TVNZ/RNZ merger. A new Local Government Minister can water down Three Waters, distance themselves from the Government of old because they're not as wedded to those projects. Jacinda Ardern had already got the wheels spinning on a policy reset, but I'm told that Chris Hipkins will take to it with more fervour. What may have been a trimming under Jacinda Ardern will be somewhat more of a scrapping under Chris Hipkins, but he would do well not to take his time on this. The Government's had all summer to mull this over. People are waiting in anticipation. Chris Hipkins has a moment to seize, and it’s time to seize it.
The complaint
[4] Paul Judge complained the broadcast breached the balance standard of the Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, particularly in relation to the comments Hipkins had ‘nothing tangible to offer’ after only a few hours in office; and was ‘stuck in a policy paralysis’. The complainant stated:
- The broadcast displayed a lack of balance and obvious political bias against a new Labour Prime Minister.
- ‘The “gotcha” headlines and the speculation Jenna Lynch enters into are not good journalism and do not serve as balanced reporting for the New Zealand public.’
- ‘The selection of a new Prime Minister is an issue of public importance and in accordance with the broadcasting standards should be discussed in news, current affairs or factual programmes in a manner that makes reasonable efforts, or gives reasonable opportunities, to present significant viewpoints.’
- ‘Jenna Lynch has clearly presented an unbalanced and biased view of the new Prime Minister’s press conference, only hours into the job, which borders on the absurd and the ridiculous.’
- ‘The New Zealand public should be aware of the conflict of interest with this particular journalist, being the partner of ACT’s Chief of Staff whilst being the political editor of one of our two major news programs’.
The broadcaster’s response
[5] Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) did not uphold the complaint, stating:
- ‘WBD is aware of the reporter’s personal relationship and has confidence in the reporter carrying out her role as Political Editor professionally and with integrity.’
- ‘As is her role, [Lynch] repeatedly asked questions of the Prime Minster and he repeatedly replied that he had only been in the role for a matter of hours and would not be making any significant announcements.’
- In the live cross, Lynch responded to the question of why Hipkins did not have anything more concrete to say, by advising it was a ‘sequencing thing’ and that Hipkins wanted to appoint his Ministers first.
- ‘The Prime Minister's perspective was faithfully reported and he took the questions from the Political Editor in good humour. In his role as Prime Minister, he would expect to be robustly questioned by the media.’
- WBD was satisfied ‘the reporter's analysis and commentary in the Broadcast is typical of the free and frank commentary routinely presented by the Political Editor which regularly features in Newshub.’ It did not consider the ‘reporting went beyond the level of robust scrutiny and political analysis that could be reasonably expected when reporting on a newly appointed Prime Minister's first Cabinet meeting.’
- ‘The Prime Minister's appointment was widely reported by most media at the time and the Committee maintains that viewers could reasonably be expected to be aware of views expressed in other coverage beyond Newshub.’
The standard
[6] The balance standard1 ensures competing viewpoints about significant issues are presented to enable the audience to arrive at an informed and reasoned opinion.2 The standard only applies to news, current affairs and factual programmes, which discuss a controversial issue of public importance.3
Our analysis
[7] We have watched the broadcast and read the correspondence listed in the Appendix.
[8] 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.4
[9] A number of criteria must be satisfied before the requirement to present significant alternative viewpoints is triggered. The standard applies only to ‘news, current affairs and factual programmes’ which discuss a controversial issue of public importance. The subject matter must be an issue ‘of public importance’, it must be ‘controversial’, and it must be ‘discussed’.5
[10] The Authority has typically defined an issue of public importance as something that would have a ‘significant potential impact on, or be of concern to, members of the New Zealand public’.6 A controversial issue is one which has topical currency and excites conflicting opinion or about which there has been ongoing public debate.7
[11] While we agree with the complainant that the selection of a new Prime Minister is a controversial issue of public importance, this issue was not the focus of the broadcast. The focus of the broadcast was that a few hours into the role of Prime Minister, Hipkins was yet to announce any policy decisions – which is not a controversial issue of public importance. Accordingly, the balance standard does not apply.
[12] Further, the complainant did not identify a particular balancing perspective they considered had been omitted from the broadcast; the crux of their complaint appears more directed at issues of bias in reporting (particularly given the reporter’s personal relationship).
[13] We note the reporter is a professional, and a very experienced journalist: her personal relationship is not a relevant consideration in the application of broadcasting standards. Secondly, (while emphasising that we do not consider the reporter’s relationship to be an indication of bias) we note regardless, the balance standard is not directed at bias in and of itself.8 Broadcasters, as a matter of freedom of expression and editorial discretion, are entitled to present matters from particular perspectives or with a particular focus.9
[14] In any event, we consider relevant perspectives were provided for in the broadcast:
- Lynch provided her perspective on why the Prime Minister had not immediately announced new policy (that he was only a few hours into the job, and needing to appoint new Ministers).
- Hipkins’s perspective was accurately conveyed (that after only a few hours on the job, he was not yet in a position to make policy announcements).
- The audience could reasonably be expected to be aware of varying perspectives, noting that on the day of the broadcast, Newshub broadcast multiple other segments on Hipkins’s first day in office.10
For the above reasons the Authority does not uphold the complaint.
Signed for and on behalf of the Authority
Tupe Solomon-Tanoa’i
Member
14 June 2023
Appendix
The correspondence listed below was received and considered by the Authority when it determined this complaint:
1 Paul Judge’s formal complaint – 27 January 2023
2 WBD’s response to the complaint – 24 February 2023
3 Judge’s referral to the Authority – 13 March 2023
4 WBD’s confirmation of no further comment – 15 March
1 Standard 5, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
2 Commentary, Standard 5, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 14
3 Guideline 5.1
4 Introduction, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 4
5 Guideline 5.1
6 Guideline 5.1
7 Guideline 5.1
8 See Wakeman and Television New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2022-057 at [25]
9 Commentary, Standard 5, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 15
10 “Chris Hipkins to be sworn in as Prime Minister” Newshub (online ed, 25 January 2023); Jamie Ensor “Chris Hipkins sworn in as Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern resigns” Newshub (online ed, 25 January 2023); Russell Palmer “Chris Hipkins puts ‘bread and butter’ issue of inflation at top of his Government’s agenda” Newshub (online ed, 25 January 2023); William Hewett “Jacinda Ardern’s resignation gives Labour better chance at 2023 election – Patrick Gower” Newshub (online ed, 25 January 2023)