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 comments made by the hosts of Midweek Mediawatch concerning sexual violence during the October 7 attacks in Israel were inaccurate, unbalanced and unfair for downplaying or denying that sexual violence occurred. During an extended discussion concerning an interview on Q + A, and how the Israel-Hamas conflict is reported on generally, the hosts noted reporting of sexual violence on 7 October 2023 had been challenged by other outlets, and mentioned that the Q + A interview did not challenge these claims. The Authority found that the statements were more consistent with analysis, comment or opinion to which the accuracy standard did not apply. However, it found relevant statements were, in any event, not misleading. The balance and fairness standards did not apply.

Not Upheld: Accuracy, Balance, Fairness

The broadcast

[1]  During the 24 April 2024 broadcast of Midweek Mediawatch, producer Hayden Donnell spoke to RNZ host Emile Donovan about a controversial interview on TVNZ’s Q + A, in which Jack Tame interviewed Israeli Ambassador to New Zealand Ran Yaakoby.

[2]  The segment lasted for approximately 11 minutes. It commenced with a discussion of Q + A’s error with some of the accompanying footage. It then discussed ‘the interview as a whole’, canvassing topics including Tame’s challenge to Yaakoby around justifying the killing of children as a ‘tactical response’ to the use of human shields, the arguments concerning interviews ‘platforming’ government representatives versus holding them accountable, and issues with the language used to describe actors in the Israel-Hamas conflict, and media bias.

[3]  The broadcast also discussed points in the interview which were left unchallenged by Tame. The programme contained the following relevant excerpts:

Donnell:      I thought there were other concerns that I’ve seen raised that at least had a bit more substance to them.

Donovan:    Such as?

Donnell:      I saw Palestinian Youth Aotearoa, they put out a press release listing some of the claims that were made in the interview. And so, for instance, both Tame and Yaakoby gave the death toll from October 7th as 1400. The best estimates we have at the moment are something like 20% lower, 1139 and as well you had assertions about atrocities that happened allegedly on October 7. Decapitations and widespread rape was one of them. Now those have been - they went through unchallenged in this interview. They have been challenged elsewhere, including at some of the outlets that published stories about them, like The New York Times that has had internal dissent in its newsroom about its story on gang rape on October 7, for instance.   

Donovan:    So you’re suggesting there are contested claims.

Donnell:      There's contested claims that probably weren't contested in the moment there. And I can see how people that come from a pro-Palestinian perspective would be upset that those were not contested or challenged in the moment. 

The complaint

[4]  Nevan Lancaster complained that the broadcast breached the accuracy, balance and fairness standards of the Code of Broadcasting Standards for the following reasons:

• ‘In the Mediawatch report your journalist denied and played down the violence that occurred on Oct 7th 2023. The denial of the huge amount of sexual assaults committed by Hamas is seriously concerning as a normal human being and listening to 2 men downplay and deny the massive crimes against the women and Children that occurred on Oct 7 2023 is very concerning.’
• ‘There is compelling evidence of sexual violence perpetrated by Hamas during the October 7 attacks. The United Nations report and independent investigations have documented instances of rape, mutilation, and sexual assault against women. These crimes are reprehensible and must not be ignored.’
• ‘To provide further context, here are some resources that offer proof of the sexual crimes committed by Hamas:
  • BBC Report: The BBC has extensively covered the sexual violence and mutilation of women during the October 7 Hamas attacks. The evidence includes broken pelvises, bruises, cuts, and tears, affecting victims of all ages.¹
  • UN Team Findings: The UN mission team found reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred during the attacks. Their report sheds light on the gravity of these crimes.²
  • Israeli Investigation: An Israeli report describes the sexual violence as systematic and collective, with evidence of violent rapes conducted in front of an audience. Hamas denies these allegations, but the testimonies and documentation speak otherwise.³’

The broadcaster’s response

[5]  RNZ did not uphold the complaint for the following reasons:

• ‘We must point out that Midweek Mediawatch is a programme that looks critically at the New Zealand media. The discussion regarding the Q+A programme dealt primarily with Q+A’s admission that the way it presented some footage of Israeli military operations in Gaza was misleading.’
• ‘While the broadcast contained references to reports of widespread sexual violence on October 7, it was not the focus of the discussion and can not objectively be characterised as denial or ‘downplaying’ these matters as they were not directly material to the issues under discussion.’

The standards

[6]  The purpose of the accuracy standard⁴ is to protect the public from being significantly misinformed.⁵ 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.

[7]  The balance standard⁶ ensures competing viewpoints about significant issues are presented to enable the audience to arrive at an informed and reasoned opinion.⁷ The standard only applies to news, current affairs and factual programmes, which discuss a controversial issue of public importance.⁸

[8]  The fairness standard⁹ protects the dignity and reputation of those featured in programmes.¹⁰ It ensures individuals and organisations taking part or referred to in broadcasts are dealt with justly and fairly and protected from unwarranted damage.

Our analysis

[9]  We have listened to the broadcast and read the correspondence listed in the Appendix.

[10]  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.¹¹

[11]  We consider this complaint is best addressed under the accuracy standard. We briefly address the remaining standards below at [20]-[21].

Accuracy

[12]  Determination of a complaint under the accuracy standard occurs in two steps. The first step is to consider whether the programme was inaccurate or misleading. The second step is to consider whether reasonable efforts were made by the broadcaster to ensure that the programme was accurate and did not mislead.

[13]  The harm that the complainant is concerned about is that the broadcast denied or downplayed sexual violence that occurred in Israel on 7 October 2023.

[14]  In our view, comments in the programme were more consistent with analysis, comment or opinion to which the accuracy standard generally does not apply.¹² However, to the extent the comments might be argued to be based on factual statements, we do not consider they were likely to mislead the audience in the way suggested by the complainant.

[15]  While the relevant segment commenced with Donnell suggesting there were concerns about the interview that ‘at least had a bit more substance to them’, the subsequent content included no conclusive view or detailed analysis regarding the accuracy or otherwise of relevant allegations of sexual violence. The programme stated ‘[Stories of sexual violence] have been challenged elsewhere, including at some of the outlets that published stories about them, like the New York Times that has had internal dissent in its newsroom about its story on gang rape on October 7, for instance’ and ‘There's contested claims that probably weren't contested in the moment there.’

[16]  Reporting that the facts of an event have been contested in other media is not the same as denying an event occurred, or downplaying the severity of what occurred. The Mediawatch broadcast, consistent with its focus on how Tame conducted a controversial interview, simply raised the issue of a particular topic not being challenged by the host.

[17]  The broadcast acknowledged dissent among other media outlets about reporting of some of the events of October 7, and noted this was not raised by Tame during the interview discussed. This was accurate, noting in particular the reporting surrounding the New York Times’ article referenced in the broadcast.¹³

[18]  Having found the programme was not misleading, it is not necessary to determine whether or not the broadcaster has made reasonable efforts to ensure the accuracy of the programme.¹⁴

[19]  Accordingly, we do not uphold this complaint under the accuracy standard.

Remaining standards

[20]  Balance: For the balance standard to apply, the broadcast must discuss a controversial issue of public importance.¹⁵ We accept that the nature and extent of sexual violence which occurred on October 7 may constitute a ‘controversial issue of public importance’ for the purposes of the standard. However, this issue was only touched on (as described above) for around 30 seconds in an item lasting approximately 11 minutes which focused on a very different topic: Tame’s interview approach and other aspects of the media’s reporting of the Israel-Hamas conflict. This short exchange did not constitute a ‘discussion’ of this specific issue as envisaged by the standard. In this context the audience would not expect other significant perspectives on the nature and extent of relevant sexual violence to be included. On this basis the standard does not apply.

[21]  Fairness: The standard concerns the fair treatment of individuals or organisations featured or referred to in broadcasts.¹⁶ The complainant has not identified any individual or organisation they consider was unfairly treated by the broadcast. On this basis the standard does not apply.

For the above reasons the Authority does not uphold the complaint.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Susie Staley
Chair
24 July 2024    

Appendix

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

1  Nevan Lancaster's formal complaint to RNZ - 24 April 2024

2  RNZ's decision on the complaint - 30 April 2024

3  Lancaster's referral to the Authority - 3 May 2024

4  RNZ confirming no further comments - 14 May 2024

¹ Lucy Williamson “Israel Gaza: Hamas raped and mutilated women on 7 October, BBC hears” BBC (online ed, 6 December 2023)
² “UN team says Hamas likely carried out sexual violence in Israel on 7 October” RNZ (online ed, 5 March 2024)
³ David Gritten “Israeli report says Hamas sexual violence 'systematic and intentional'” BBC (online ed, 22 February 2024)
⁴ Standard 6, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand 
⁵ Commentary, Standard 6, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 16
⁶ Standard 5, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁷ Commentary, Standard 5, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 14
⁸ Guideline 5.1
⁹ Standard 8, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
¹⁰ Commentary, Standard 8, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 20
¹¹ Introduction, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 4
¹² Guideline 6.1
¹³ See for example: Jeremy Scahill, Ryan Grim, Daniel Boguslaw ““BETWEEN THE HAMMER AND THE ANVIL” The Story Behind the New York Times October 7 Exposé” The Intercept (online ed, 28 February 2024); Jeremy Scahill, Ryan Grim “KIBBUTZ BE’ERI REJECTS STORY IN NEW YORK TIMES OCTOBER 7 EXPOSÉ: “THEY WERE NOT SEXUALLY ABUSED”” The Intercept (online ed, 4 March 2024); David Folkenflik “Newsroom at 'New York Times' fractures over story on Hamas attacks” NPR (online ed, 6 March 2024); Laura Wagner “Journalism professors call on New York Times to review Oct. 7 report” Washington Post (online ed, 29 April 2024)
¹⁴ Van der Merwe and Mediaworks TV Ltd, Decision No. 2019-015 at [21]
¹⁵ Standard 5, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
¹⁶ Standard 8, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand