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 that a Newshub Live at 6pm report into the crash of China Eastern Flight MU5735 breached the accuracy, fairness, and discrimination and denigration standards. The complaint was in relation to speculation the crash might have been due to a deliberate act from the cockpit. The Authority acknowledged, while the discussion on the recently occurring tragedy may have been distressing to some viewers, the words were clearly stated as commentary, analysis and opinion, rather than fact, and therefore the accuracy standard did not apply. No discrimination or denigration was found, and the fairness standard did not apply.

Not Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness, Discrimination and Denigration

The broadcast

[1]  A segment on Newshub Live at 6pm on 22 March 2022 reported on the crash of China Eastern Flight MU5735, which had occurred the day before. In the introduction, co-host Samantha Hayes stated ‘a Chinese airliner that dived into the ground, killing everyone on board, may have been a deliberate act by someone in the cockpit.’ Co-host Mike McRoberts continued ‘it’s a theory that might explain the aircraft’s mysterious vertical plunge from 29,000 feet.’

[2]  The report included footage of the aircraft’s rapid descent and comment from an aviation journalist to the effect that ‘Typically, in the past this sort of profile has been associated… sadly, tragically, with suicides. SilkAir in 1997, Germanwings. These sort of tragedies, it is almost as though the plane was being controlled.’

The complaint

[3]  Roger Yuan complained that the broadcast was insensitive and breached the accuracy, fairness, and discrimination and denigration standards:

• The statement that the crash might have been deliberate was ‘fake and inaccurate news’, and was ‘100% speculation’.
• The statement was ‘extremely disappointing, irresponsible, and damaging’.
• Under the discrimination and denigration standard, Yuan alleged opening the segment with the words ‘a Chinese Airliner’ had an element of discrimination, which continued throughout the segment.

The broadcaster’s response

[4]  Discovery NZ Ltd (Discovery) did not uphold the complaint for the following reasons:

• Discovery apologised for any distress the broadcast caused the complainant, but noted the broadcast was reporting on the commentary the crash attracted globally, and there was speculation the crash could have been a deliberate act due to the very steep descent of the aircraft mid-flight. Discovery was satisfied the information was appropriate to report and the audience was not misled.
• Discovery maintained the broadcast did not contain content that could be considered a breach of the discrimination and denigration standard, as it was a ‘straightforward report about the crash with no adverse or harmful comments about any section of the community’. 

The standards

[5]  The purpose of the accuracy standard¹ is to protect the public from being significantly misinformed.² It states that broadcasters should make reasonable efforts to ensure that any news, current affairs or factual programme is accurate in relation to all material points of fact, and does not mislead.

[6]  The fairness standard³ protects the dignity and reputation of those featured in programmes.⁴ It ensures individuals and organisations are dealt with justly and fairly and protected from unwarranted damage.

[7]  The discrimination and denigration standard⁵ states broadcasters should not encourage discrimination against, or denigration of, any recognised ‘section of the community’. It protects sections of the community from verbal and other attacks, and fosters a community commitment to equality.⁶

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 reasonable and justified.⁷

Accuracy

[10]  The accuracy standard does not apply to statements which are clearly distinguishable as analysis, comment, or opinion, rather than statements of fact.⁸

[11]  The broadcast speculated the plane might have crashed due to a deliberate act. Both presenters qualified their statements with the words ‘may’ or ‘might’, and noted this was a ‘theory’ as to the cause of the crash. The rest of the broadcast reinforced this position. In the circumstances, the statements complained about were clearly distinguishable as analysis, comment and opinion, and were not statements of fact. Accordingly, the accuracy standard does not apply.

[12]  In any event, the report would not have misled an audience to conclude this theory was the definitive cause of the crash. It was noted later in the programme President Xi Jinping had ordered an investigation into the cause of the crash. This further signalled to viewers the segment was merely addressing a theory.

Fairness

[13]  The complainant does not specify who was allegedly treated unfairly.

[14]  Speculation the crash was deliberate has the potential to damage the reputation of the pilots. However, the pilots, now deceased, were not named or identified.

[15]  In this context, we do not uphold the complaint under this standard.

Discrimination and denigration

[16]  The discrimination and denigration standard does not apply to individuals but to recognised ‘sections of the community’ which are consistent with the grounds for discrimination listed in the Human Rights Act 1993.

[17]  The importance of freedom of expression means a high level of condemnation, often with an element of malice or nastiness, will be necessary to conclude a broadcast encouraged discrimination or denigration in contravention of the standard.⁹

[18]  The complainant suggested the statement the airline was a ‘Chinese airliner’ indicated an element of discrimination in the broadcast. In our view, the complaint concerns an interpretation of the presenters’ comments that few viewers are likely to reach. We consider the reference was factual only. There was no disrespect or hint of malice towards the Chinese people in the presenters’ tones, or the rest of the broadcast, and the report recognised the crash as a tragic event. We note further the broadcast referenced two previous crashes that have been attributed to pilot suicide, SilkAir and Germanwings, both of which are not Chinese airliners.

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

Susie Staley
Chair
18 May 2022   

Appendix

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

1  Roger Yuan’s original complaint to Discovery – 22 March 2022

2  Discovery’s response to Yuan’s original complaint – 8 April 2022

3  Yuan’s referral to the Authority – 14 April 2022

4  Discovery’s confirmation of no further comment – 22 April 2022

¹ Standard 9,Free-To-Air Television Code of Broadcasting Practice
² Commentary: Accuracy, Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand Codebook, page 18
³ Standard 11, Free-To-Air TelevisionCode of Broadcasting Practice
⁴ Commentary: Fairness, Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand Codebook, page 21
⁵ Standard 6,Free-To-Air Television Code of Broadcasting Practice
⁶ Commentary: Discrimination and Denigration, Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand Codebook, page 16
⁷ Freedom of Expression: Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand Codebook, page 6
⁸ Guideline 9a
⁹ Commentary: Discrimination and Denigration, Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand Codebook, page 16