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 1News item breached the accuracy standard by claiming a 24-hour period in October 2024 was Dunedin’s ‘wettest day in a century’. In the context of an almost 10-minute-long live broadcast reporting on a regional state of emergency, the comments did not amount to material points of fact. Their inclusion would not have affected viewers’ understanding of the overall item, as its purpose was to provide information to New Zealanders during a natural disaster. Furthermore, live reporting on extreme weather events carries high public interest, and this broadcast did not create harm at a level justifying restriction of the broadcaster’s freedom of expression.

Not Upheld: Accuracy

The broadcast

[1]  The 4 October 2024 broadcast of 1News included an almost 10-minute-long report on heavy rainfall and flooding in Dunedin. Introducing the segment, the 1News presenter said:

Tēnā tatou katoa. Good evening. A state of emergency is still in place tonight across Otago and Dunedin. Surface flooding’s affecting roads across the region. There are widespread road closures, multiple slips, and some people may be without power until tomorrow. Around 80 people spent last night in emergency shelters. The city suffered its wettest day in a century. Worst hit: South Dunedin. The water heading towards houses … but authorities say water pipes and pumps coped well, the rivers are behaving as expected, and the resilience of residents is being praised. There is a warning though. It’s not over yet – the red heavy rain warning in place until 11 o’clock tonight.

[2]  The item discussed the nature of the flooding and how it was impacting Dunedin and its residents:

1News reporter [voiceover]:            The last flood on this scale was back in 2015. [Dunedin resident] remembers it well.

Dunedin resident:                             Just checking the property for flood damage. Last time it flooded, it was right up to just below the door.

Dunedin mayor:                                It’s the most rain in 100 years, because there was another big event in ‘68 that was noticeably bigger than ‘15. So, for this to be bigger than both of those is pretty enormous.

1News reporter [voiceover]:            The city’s stormwater pumps are coping with the deluge this time, but the mayor says there’s still work to do, and he’ll be asking for government support.

Dunedin mayor:                                We have to do something significant now. We’ve done all the fine tuning, now we have to take some significant, large steps. And that is going to happen. I won’t be taking no for an answer. It’s as simple as that.

Emergency Mgmt. Minister:            As a country, we’re going to continue to be hit with these weather events. The reality of it is, it’s the way we respond. And, I have to say that the response down here, like I said, has been gold standard.

[3]  The broadcast provided information regarding:

• ‘what’s available for people who need help’:
  • identifying the location for an open welfare centre for those who felt ‘unsafe or uneasy this evening with more rain to come’
  • conveying officials’ advice about the level of donations received and their request for people to help in other ways (eg to assist with sandbagging)
  • noting (via a banner) affected farmers had been promised up to $50,000 in Government support
• other areas affected: including a warning to Clutha District residents (via a banner) stating ‘Clutha District asking people to stay off roads’
• ‘the very latest on road closures’: detailing areas closed on State Highways 1, 85, 87, 88 and 90, with footage depicting examples of the slips and flooding on roads
• advice for people travelling in the region: noting
  • road closures were expected to remain in place overnight (with a banner indicating ‘NZTA advise to delay journeys and avoid worst affected roads’)
  • accommodation in affected areas was ‘filling up with some having no rooms at all’.

[4]  At the end of the broadcast, the 1News.co.nz website was promoted as a source of the latest updates, during which some of the text on screen read, ‘Live: Dunedin records wettest day in over a century, up to 60mm still to fall’.

The complaint

[5]  Ian Wishart complained the broadcast misrepresented the severity of the rainstorm in Dunedin and breached the accuracy standard by claiming it was Dunedin’s wettest day in a century when it was not. The complainant provided detailed submissions, key points from which are summarised below:

The statement was inaccurate

• Television New Zealand Ltd (TVNZ) relied on a NIWA tweet, which stated it was referencing Musselburgh specifically (one of Dunedin’s weather stations) and used the term ‘provisionally’ (suggesting the claim had not yet been confirmed). TVNZ therefore did not quote the tweet accurately.
• The suggestion that it was Dunedin’s wettest day in a century ‘is demonstrably false. October 2024 was not even the wettest day in Musselburgh in the last decade, let alone the wettest in a century’. Various weather stations in Dunedin, including Musselburgh, have recorded higher levels of rain, with events from 1923, 1929, 1968, 1980, and 2015 surpassing the rainfall from 9am 3 October to 9am 4 October 2024.
• Official weather readings may be taken from 9am to 9am, but NIWA consistently publishes rainfall data beyond the 9am to 9am time window (including 4am to 4am rainfall data in connection to the 2015 Otago floods). The broadcast should have, at least, clearly stipulated the 24-hour-timeframe in question was 9am to 9am.
• It is inaccurate to say NIWA ‘only reports official climate data from one weather station per city’

The statement was a material point of fact

• When introducing the segment, the presenter said, ‘The city suffered its wettest day in a century.’ The presenter’s statement was the lead angle for the story. It framed the event as exceptional and insinuated a link to broader issues (eg climate change), making it a material point of fact.
• ‘The distinction between a 1-in-100-year event and a 1-in-13-year storm is not semantic.’ They are fundamentally different. ‘Any error in presenting such a significant claim clearly misleads the audience’ in breach of the accuracy standard.
• ‘Far from being a climate supercharged 1-in-100-year monster that should panic the public and affect their land values, these storms are running on average of 1-in-13 years: something that councils should routinely plan for.’
• ‘Had 1News given a sober and accurate précis of Dunedin’s deluge history, maybe harder questions would have been asked of city planners, whose [forebears], incidentally built South Dunedin on a reclaimed swamp.’
• The materiality of the comment was reflected in the fact that major news outlets started reporting that it was ‘Dunedin’s wettest day’.

TVNZ did not make reasonable efforts to ensure accuracy

• TVNZ’s source was a NIWA tweet, ‘which explicitly noted the 2024 data as “provisional” and limited to the Musselburgh gauge’.
• The broadcast failed to:
  • verify and fact check NIWA’s tweet before broadcasting the information contained in the tweet
  • confirm whether Musselburgh represented the city as a whole or was just one weather station’s reading
  • question the reliability of NIWA’s records.
• TVNZ has been put on notice, via media releases on the complainant’s articles,¹ that NIWA’s climate records are not reliable.

The broadcaster’s response

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

• It was not misleading or inaccurate for 1News to report Dunedin had endured its wettest day in over a century:
  • It is commonplace to have one official weather station for a particular region. For Dunedin, this station is Musselburgh.
  • The Musselburgh weather station was widely reporting as having observed its ‘wettest day in over a century’. NIWA tweeted, ‘the last time it was at least this wet in Musselburgh was in April 1923’. The Musselburgh station is located centrally, within Dunedin city, and ‘the expert body which operates the stations refers to Dunedin in its tweet’.
• The complainant cited that a rain event in 2015 surpassed the rainfall of 3 and 4 October 2024. Chris Brandolino from NIWA confirmed that official weather readings are taken from 9am to 9am, but the 2015 rain event ‘occurred between 4:00am and 4:00am, which is outside the timeframe used for official records’. NIWA’s figures were therefore accurate. Further, 9am to 9am is the standard worldwide scientific convention for 24-hour rainfall readings.
• The statement was not a material point of fact in the context of a broadcast about severe flooding that resulted in the declaration of a state of emergency, and it constituted ‘a small part of the discussion overall’.
• NIWA is an expert body, and TVNZ was entitled to rely on information supplied by NIWA in its reporting.
• The cause of the flooding was not solely attributable to anthropogenic climate change. An online 1News article explained that flooding in South Dunedin was due in part to it ‘being reclaimed estuarine wetland connecting Otago Harbour to the Pacific Ocean’.

The standard

[7]  The purpose of the accuracy standard (Standard 6) is to protect the public from being significantly misinformed.² The standard states:³

Broadcasters should make reasonable efforts to ensure news, current affairs or factual content:

• is accurate in relation to all material points of fact
• does not materially mislead the audience (give a wrong idea or impression of the facts).

Further, where a material error of fact has occurred, broadcasters should correct it within a reasonable period after they have been put on notice.

Our analysis

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

[9]  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

Accuracy

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

[11]  The complaint centres around the broadcast’s statements to the effect that 4 October 2024 was Dunedin’s wettest day in a century.

[12]  This term appeared in a post on X by NIWA Weather made earlier in the day on 4 October. The post indicated NIWA’s relevant results to be provisional and to relate to readings at the Musselburgh weather station:⁵

Provisionally, Dunedin (Musselburgh) has just observed its second-wettest day on record with 130.8 mm from 9:00 am Thursday-9:00 am Friday. 
It has been their wettest day in over a century; the last time it was at least this wet in Musselburgh was in April 1923.

[13]  The complainant states NIWA’s post was inaccurately described by 1News because it failed to emphasise the result’s provisional nature, and the post itself was misleading in suggesting the day may have been Dunedin’s wettest in over a century. The latter issue is complicated by questions around the appropriate methodology for making such an assessment.

[14]  The Authority’s role, however, is not to rule on the appropriate methodology for calculating rainfall levels – and resolution of that issue is not necessary to determine this complaint. This is because, as outlined in Guideline 6.2, the standard is not concerned with technical or other points unlikely to significantly affect the audience’s understanding of the broadcast as a whole. Wishart’s concerns, as outlined in paragraph [13], fall within that category.

[15]  In the context of an almost 10-minute-long live broadcast reporting on an ongoing state of emergency, it was not material to understand whether the extreme weather event in progress was the worst in 100 or in 13 years. More precise information regarding Dunedin rainfall data would not have affected viewers’ understanding of the overall item which, in our view, was intended to inform viewers about the emergency, convey official warnings and provide information about the event’s impacts, the assistance available to those affected, how volunteers could best help, and issues for travellers.

[16]  The complainant considers the ‘wettest day’ comment to be a material point based on it:

• being in the broadcast’s introduction (as ‘the lead angle’ which ‘set the tone and context’)
• having the potential to mislead viewers as to whether it was a ‘climate supercharged 1-in-100 year’ event that should ‘panic the public’ or a 1- in-13-year event for which councils should be planning (noting that misrepresentation of the event might stop ‘harder questions’ being asked of city planners)
• being a term picked up and subsequently reported on by other outlets.

[17]  However, the term’s inclusion in the introduction, or reporting by other media, is not determinative of its materiality, and this was not a story focused on climate change or council planning responsibilities. At the time of broadcast, Dunedin City and Clutha District were both in states of local emergency due to ‘significant impacts caused by heavy rainfall’ and flooding.⁶ Around 100 people were evacuated from 60 homes overnight from 3 to 4 October, and almost 50 properties were red or yellow stickered because of the floods.⁷

[18]  Reporting on such extreme weather events carries significant public interest. The public relies on media sources for information about natural disasters, such as real-time updates and safety advice. It is important for them to appreciate the scale and impact of such events to act and prepare themselves accordingly.⁸

[19]  In these circumstances, we would not intervene to restrict the broadcaster’s freedom of expression unless the broadcast created a risk of serious harm. The risk of concern to the complainant was around viewers misunderstanding the frequency or cause of such storms. In the context of this broadcast, such a risk did not create harm at a level justifying regulatory intervention and we have identified no other harm that did.⁹

[20]  Having found the programme was not materially misleading, it is not necessary to determine whether the broadcaster made reasonable efforts to ensure accuracy of the programme.¹⁰ However, we note our disagreement with the proposition that NIWA, being a Crown Research Institute established specifically to undertake scientific research and related activities, should be regarded as ‘unreliable’.¹¹

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

Susie Staley
Chair
26 March 2025    

Appendix

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

1  Ian Wishart’s complaint to TVNZ – 7 October 2024

2  TVNZ’s decision on the complaint – 1 November 2024

3  Wishart’s referral to the Authority – 17 November 2024

4  Wishart’s supporting documents – 17 November 2024

5  TVNZ’s further comments – 23 December 2024

6  Wishart’s further comments – 10 January 2025

7  TVNZ’s confirmation of no further comments – 17 February 2025

¹ Ian Wishart “TOO HOT TO HANDLE: NIWA’s misleading temperature records” Centrist (online ed, 1 February 2024); Ian Wishart “Has NIWA Misled Parliament? Climate agency feels the heat after OIA dump” Centrist (online ed, 12 July 2024); Ian Wishart “Eleven killed – NIWA’s lack of historic storm knowledge a factor, concludes damning report” Centrist (online ed, 26 July 2024); Ian Wishart “NIWA Minister errs in communicating to Centrist” Centrist (online ed, 12 August 2024); Ian Wishart “Minister blames NIWA’s missing storm data on World War 2” Centrist (online ed, 17 August 2024)
² Commentary, Standard 6, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 16
³ Standard 6, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁴ Introduction, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 4
⁵ See NIWA Weather (@NiwaWeather) www.x.com on 4 October 2024
⁶ Civil Defence “Declared States of Emergency” <www.civildefence.govt.nz>
⁷ “’Worst is over’: MetService downgrades rain warning for South” Otago Daily Times (online ed, 4 October 2024); “Dunedin and Otago residents lodge more than 1000 claims for flood damage” Radio New Zealand (online ed, 17 October 2024)
⁸ Morton and Television New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2017-004 at [8]
⁹ For a similar finding, see Greene and Television New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2024-063 at [10]
¹⁰ Van der Merwe and Mediaworks TV Ltd, Decision No. 2019-015 at [21]
¹¹ NIWA “Our company” <www.niwa.co.nz>