Source: Radio New Zealand
RNZ headlines the broadcasting minister’s response in the House. RNZ Mediawatch
“There’s a power imbalance and it’s also off-the-record in an ‘under the desk’-style and I just find that dangerous,” former broadcasting minister Marian Hobbs told RNZ politics show The Whip last Wednesday.
She was reacting to current broadcasting minister Paul Goldsmith telling reporters in Parliament earlier that day TVNZ’s board chair Andrew Barclay had called him the previous weekend.
Goldsmith said that during the call Barclay raised a TVNZ 1News story aired last week – about the rising number of gang members – which had irritated Goldsmith and others in the government.
It didn’t come up on The Whip, but back in 2005 a former Labour colleague Hobbs appointed to the TVNZ board – Dame Anne Hercus – resigned in the wake of a row in which she was accused of leaking information about Judy Bailey’s salary to the government.
The scandal that followed created pressure on the entire TVNZ board to quit.
“The broadcasting law is clear that no minister can give media instructions about political coverage or anything like that,” Goldsmith said when questioned about it in Parliament the next day.
The editorial independence of TVNZ is protected by the TVNZ Act 2003, which says no minister should interfere with news at the state-owned broadcaster. TVNZ’s own editorial policy also has rules on influence from inside and out.
TVNZ board members are not supposed to exert influence on news or respond to complaints about it either.
You could be forgiven for thinking that only the media and political people would care about what seems like an obscure line that might be crossed. But while instances are rare – or rarely become public – it does matter if it happens.
How did this controversy come to light?
It was sparked by another story aired on 1News last Tuesday – all about the latest Crime and Victims survey showing 49,000 fewer victims of violent crime than in 2023.
Those figures were announced five days earlier – and hailed by the government as an endorsement of the government’s policies.
But they were not reported on 1 News on that day, when the same senior political reporter – Benedict Collins – instead reported on the official number of gang members overtaking the number of police officers.
Collins also pointed out the PM had said – in a pre-election debate in 2023 – this would not happen. The story also included Hamiltonians saying crime appeared to be getting worse there.
“Absolutely unbelievable that on a day that the Government announces 49,000 fewer victims of violent crime and a 22 per cent decrease in serious repeat youth offending — 1News chose instead to engage in unbalanced journalism,” police minister Mark Mitchell vented on Facebook.
Cabinet colleagues endorsed the post as “a must-read”.
On Newstalk ZB’s afternoon show the next day, Mark Mitchell said TVNZ had called him and apologised for that story.
“My message to them was: ‘if you want to maintain public confidence, just engage in balanced journalism. You shouldn’t be a mouthpiece for the opposition either.’”
It’s very unusual for a broadcaster to apologise formally to a politician like that.
It came under the headline: The Govt gets its wish from 1News – a headline on fewer crime victims.
Newsroom co-editor Tim Murphy cited “concern within the wider TVNZ operation about who in the company was involved in discussions about broadcasting a second story that would include the Government-favourable statistics”.
“If there is evidence of the directors being across the decision, or involved in encouraging a second report to assuage Government criticisms, the company can be sure of another round of political attention – from opposition parties.”
And the media.
Did TVNZ’s directors seek to direct its news?
On Wednesday, Mark Mitchell told the House he did not contact TVNZ or its board members.
But Paul Goldsmith – who’s also the Justice Minister – told reporters the TVNZ board chair Andrew Barclay had called him last weekend. He insisted that when the gang numbers story came up, he told Barclay he couldn’t discuss it.
Asked in the House the next day if the Chair should have raised TVNZ reporting with the minister at all, Goldsmith said: “in the context of a board focusing on improving levels of trust … I don’t have a particularly strong view. He probably shouldn’t have, but it’s certainly not a major issue”.
But it would be if TVNZ news responded to pressure or instruction from within the broadcaster as a result of complaints from government ministers – or its own governors acting on them.
TVNZ’s response
An earlier statement TVNZ said it chose to run the follow-up story in the interests of balance.
TVNZ said the board takes an interest in how editorial standards are maintained, [but] decisions on how stories are covered are made independently.
TVNZ told Mediawatch chief executive Jodie O’Donnell concluded the positive crime stats could have been included in the otherwise-accurate gang numbers story aired on Thursday last week.
She asked news leaders last Monday to look at the story, but TVNZ says that process was already underway.
Mediawatch asked to speak to TVNZ CEO Jodie O’Donnell. TVNZ declined citing “a full dance card” on the day TVNZ released its latest financial results.
On Friday the New Zealand Herald quoted Jodie O’Donnell – also the company’s editor-in-chief – as saying there was “no political or board interference.”
But she also told the Herald the TVNZ chair Andrew Barclay had asked her: ‘Are you comfortable that we’ve maintained editorial standards?’”
Mediawatch asked TVNZ if the government’s criticism of the gang numbers story was discussed by the TVNZ board members. And if so, was the board’s response then communicated to CEO Jodie O’Donnell – or to broadcasting minister Paul Goldsmith?
TVNZ said Minister Mitchell’s Facebook post was raised by board directors with CEO Jodi O’Donnell but “Board Directors have not discussed the story with the CEO – or given any editorial direction.”
TVNZ also told Mediawatch the CEO did not direct political editor Maiki Sherman to apologise to the Minister of Police last week.
TVNZ also said O’Donnell had no role in the follow-up story last Tuesday – and has not given reporters any instruction about changing their approach to balance in future political reporting as a result of complaints about the original ‘gang numbers’ story.
Crossing the line?
RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly
The TVNZ Act 2003 says no shareholding minister – or any minister – can “give direction to TVNZ in respect of its programmes, content or any complaints about its content or the gathering or presentation of its news and current affairs”.
“‘Direction’ isn’t defined in the act, but … a ‘direction’ is something that is quite formal. It’s more than seeking to influence pressure on an organisation. It has to be a formal requirement,” University of Otago law professor Andrew Geddis told Mediawatch.
“This is more a question of the sort of relationship we think the governing body of TVNZ ought to have with a minister – and what he should be talking with the minister about in private.”
“If it’s to gauge how upset the Minister is and what sort of risk of blowback there is for the organisation, that’s troubling because it would seem to indicate the board is worried that how news is operating may harm the wider organisation in the future.”
Police Minister Mark Mitchell criticising TVNZ’s “unbalanced” news journalism would not breach the TVNZ Act.
“What it does do though is raise this question of how ought ministers seek to express their disappointment or disagreement with media. There is a formal structure for complaints … through the Broadcasting Standards Authority,” Prof Geddis said.
“Complaining to that body and getting a formal ruling on does have a kind of disciplining effect on the media.”
Why apologise?
Two years ago David Seymour criticised a Benedict Collins story including a health advocate who David Seymour said had earlier criticised him. He also criticised TVNZ correspondent John Campbell for quoting and linking to a left-wing blogger.
“We are not asking for sympathy but are asking for our politicians to respect the independence of our media so they can get on with their work,” TVNZ said at the time.
Last week, TVNZ’s political editor Maiki Sherman apologised to Police Minister Mark Mitchell about that gang numbers story that aired last week.
The ‘good news’ crime survey stats could have been included as relevant and newsworthy context, or mentioned in the introduction, or even reported elsewhere in the bulletin.
But news shows and their reporters have every right to zero in on an angle when they see one. As Benedict Collins pointed out in his report last week, gang membership overtaking the police was part of a trend. It also contradicted a previous promise from the prime minister and it was tied to the parallel issue of police recruitment targets.
As Newsroom’s Tim Murphy pointed out on RNZ’s Midday Report, the Ministry of Justice surveys come out frequently and recent ones have also recorded significant falls in reported crime.
Editorial oversight at NZME
Questions about influence on the news were also raised last year when Trade Me bought a share in Stuff Digital last year – and when NZME created an Editorial Advisory Board (EAB).
That came out of the bid by activist shareholder James Grenon to persuade other shareholders to replace the entire NZME board – and introduce greater oversight news at the New Zealand Herald and Newstalk ZB.
The appointment this week of Hamish Rutherford as chair of the EAB raised eyebrows.
He was a business journalist before becoming Chief Press Secretary to Christopher Luxon until late 2024 when he left to become a PR professional.
This week NZME told Mediawatch that Rutherford would continue working in PR while chairing the board advising NZME on its editorial matters.
“I’ve been upfront with [NZME] chairman Steven Joyce about my other work and will continue to be,” Rutherford told The Post.
Steven Joyce told The Post the EAB did not make editorial decisions and “all members are subject to our conflict of interest policies”.
Joyce is also a consultant who has contracted for government projects such as a medical school for the University of Waikato.
The PR firm Hamish Rutherford works for – BRG – told The Post it sees no conflict of interest problems.
“If any perceived or actual conflicts of interest arise, we will manage them quickly and appropriately,” managing director Georgina Stylianou said.
But that won’t be done in public – all behind closed doors at NZME, unless details are shared with investors in scheduled briefings or if it comes up from the floor at AGMs.
“So NZME – chaired by a former National Party cabinet minister and campaign manager – has appointed an editorial board that’s going to be chaired by a former National Party press secretary,” Labour leader Chris Hipkins told The Post when he was made aware the appointment.
And there are two other former press secretaries on the four-person board, one of whom – Brent Webling – also served National party leaders.
And this alarmed the Democracy Project’s Dr Bryce Edwards – a longtime advocate of tightening up on lobbying.
“A practising government relations lobbyist is now leading the body that provides “advice, support and constructive challenge” to NZME’s editorial team. The board advises on editorial standards, audience development, and – tellingly – “strategic positioning in New Zealand’s evolving media landscape,’ Dr Edwards wrote.
He said while NZME is a private company and is entitled to appoint whoever it likes, “public perception is the whole point of being a news organisation.”
The other main thing news organisations do telling the public things they need to know.
NZME wasn’t willing to talk openly about the work of its EAB this week.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
