BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary

The INCIS police contract cancellation by IBM was the subject of a talkback/voteline segment on Good Morning, broadcast on TV One between 10.00am and 12.00pm on 11 August 1999.

Mr McLean complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, that there had been a lack of balance in the treatment of the issue in both a trailer for Good Morning, and in the programme itself.

TVNZ upheld part of the complaint. It acknowledged that the treatment of the issue on the programme was unbalanced because it had not included an alternative view to that of the presenter. It advised that it had reviewed Good Morning’s approach to political issues as a consequence.

Mr McLean contended that TVNZ’s action in response to the upheld complaint was inadequate. In his view, TVNZ should have broadcast a statement about its standards breach.

As he was dissatisfied with the action taken, Mr McLean referred the complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

For the reasons given below, the Authority declines to uphold the complaint about the inadequacy of the broadcaster’s action.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed a tape of the item complained about, and have read the correspondence which is listed in the Appendix. On this occasion, the Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

The cancellation of the INCIS contract with the Police by IBM was the subject of discussion on Good Morning, broadcast on TV One, beginning at 10.00am on 11 August. Mr McLean complained to TVNZ about the treatment of the issue in the programme, and in a trailer for the programme.

TVNZ upheld the aspect of the complaint that referred to the programme and said that it had breached standard G6. This standard requires broadcasters:

G6  To show balance, impartiality and fairness in dealing with political matters, current affairs and all questions of a controversial nature.

In TVNZ’s view, the item had failed to provide balance on the INCIS issue, as the Government’s perspective had not been presented to viewers. TVNZ then explained circumstances that it considered may have given rise to the imbalance on this occasion. It advised that Sir William Birch was scheduled to appear on the programme to discuss the INCIS issue. A fire alarm then forced the evacuation of TVNZ’s Television Centre, and Sir William was called away from the broadcast during this break.

TVNZ reported that it had discussed the specifics of the complaint with the producers of Good Morning, who acknowledged that they needed to approach political issues with renewed diligence, especially during the period before the upcoming election. Also, TVNZ said that there would be further in-house discussion as contentious topics for talkback/voteline were identified.

Mr McLean complained to the Authority that the action taken by TVNZ was "quite inadequate". In his view, it would have been appropriate for TVNZ to broadcast a statement about his complaint. He advanced three reasons in support of this contention. First, he said it was warranted by the significance of the matter. Secondly, he considered that because of the level of trust the public repose in broadcasters as a source of information, the public should be made aware of standards breaches "should a similar lapse occur in future". Finally, he observed that an individual complainant would find it difficult to publicise an upheld complaint.

In its response to the Authority, TVNZ said that rather than broadcast a statement about the complaint, it thought it far better to revise its processes so that a similar breach of standards would not happen again. It noted that, as a consequence of the upheld complaint, a dialogue had been opened between Good Morning’s production team and TVNZ’s News and Current Affairs area. It contended that this would allow similar issues to be talked through "in the context of a journalistic exercise" before being put to air.

In his final comment to the Authority, Mr McLean wrote that he accepted it was not always necessary to publicise an upheld complaint. However, he maintained that this was a case where publicity would fulfil a vital function. He also disagreed with TVNZ’s view that public confusion would result from publicising an upheld complaint.

Mr McLean went on to suggest that there were alternative methods of publicising upheld complaints, other than by broadcast on television. He observed that complaints and responses could be published on a broadcaster’s website and that a summary could be published in The Listener. He then said that he would be satisfied if such a course of action was taken in relation to his upheld complaint.

The Authority’s Findings

The Authority was asked by Mr McLean to review the action taken by TVNZ in response to his upheld complaint. Its task is to determine whether this action was sufficient.

In considering the adequacy of TVNZ’s action, the Authority notes the presenter’s references in the programme to the INCIS issue as the "last nail in the Government’s coffin", following media attention concerning WINZ and the Tourism Board. These matters involved considerable criticism of the Government. In addition, the Authority finds that the presenter’s phrasing of the talkback/voteline question to viewers was unbalanced, because of its apparent anti-government flavour.

The Authority also notes the following circumstances relating to the broadcast complained about. First, TVNZ advised that Sir William Birch was scheduled to appear on the programme to discuss the INCIS issue. A fire alarm then forced the evacuation of TVNZ’s Television Centre, and Sir William was called away from the broadcast during this break. The Authority recognises that the opportunity for advancing a counterbalancing view was constrained as a result of this forced break. It accepts TVNZ’s contention that Sir William’s appearance may well have provided the balance that it found the programme lacked.

In addition, the Authority notes that, as a result of the admitted breach, there will now be a closer relationship between Good Morning’s producers and TVNZ’s news and current affairs team.

As to Mr McLean’s suggestion about publicising upheld complaints on broadcaster websites or in The Listener, the Authority notes that all its decisions are published on its website – www.bsa.govt.nz.

In view of the action taken by TVNZ and the extenuating circumstances, the Authority concludes that TVNZ’s actions, having upheld an aspect of the complaint, were appropriate and sufficient.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
28 October 1999

Appendix

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

1.    Ian McLean’s Complaint to TVNZ – 11 August 1999

2.    Television New Zealand Ltd’s Response to the Formal Complaint – 20 August 1999

3.    Mr McLean’s Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 30 August 1999

4.    TVNZ’s Response to the Authority – 3 September 1999

5.    Mr McLean’s Final Comment – 13 September 1999