BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary  

[This summary does not form part of the decision.]  

An item on 1 News covering COVID-19 vaccination mandate protests disrupting Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s engagements showed a protester claiming the Pfizer vaccination was ‘experimental until 2023’. The complainant argued the item lacked balance as it did not clarify that the views expressed by the protester were their own, or include any counter views from an expert. The Authority found the balance standard did not apply as the broadcast did not amount to a relevant ‘discussion’ of the issue which the complainant alleged was unbalanced (the safety of the Pfizer vaccine).

Not Upheld: Balance

The broadcast

[1]  An item on 1 News on 3 November 2021 reported on anti-vaccination protests in Whanganui and Hunterville disrupting Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s engagements in the area. The item began as follows:

Host:                  The Prime Minister's been forced to abandon two scheduled stops in Whanganui and Hunterville to avoid confrontation with a large group of anti-vax demonstrators. It's the second day in a row Jacinda Ardern's plans have been disrupted by protesters. Political reporter Benedict Collins was there.

Reporter:            Anti-vaxxers were lying in wait, turning up en masse and itching for a confrontation with the Prime Minister. This educator outraged at the vaccination mandate:

Protester:           [Cut to protest] From the 15th my job is gone, because I choose personally not to have the vaccine, because the vaccine is an experimental trial until 2023.

[2]  The broadcast included comment from other protesters, as well as comments from Ardern during a press conference. In relation to the protesters, Ardern stated:

Ardern:               Nor am I taking that personally, nor am I surprised. You know, we are at a stage in the vaccine rollout where we are trying to reach into communities that may hold firm views, but we need to have those conversations.

Reporter:           [In the studio] Just not with the protesters today, although she defended the need for all teachers to be double jabbed.

Ardern:               This is about certain workforces and workplaces where we've applied an assessment over whether or not we have a duty of care to look after those most vulnerable.

[3]  The broadcast also included comment from a Hunterville resident:

I would say the vast majority of Hunterville and its surrounds agree with the - potentially not the mandate - but definitely the whole vaccination thing.

The complaint

[4]  Denise Frost complained the item was unbalanced because it showed a protester saying the Pfizer vaccine was an ‘experimental trial until 2023’ without clarifying that the views expressed were their own, or including any counter views from an expert (such as a vaccinologist or epidemiologist). The complainant stated:

• ‘We are in the middle of a very serious and far reaching global pandemic and are currently running a nationwide vaccination programme and comments such as this being aired on national television do damage to the promotion of the vaccination programme and are assisting the spread of misinformation.’
• Such broadcasts ‘could potentially do damage to the efforts to get the vaccine hesitant vaccinated’.

The broadcaster’s response

[5]  TVNZ did not uphold the complaint under the balance standard, stating:

• While the issue of the anti-vax protests may be an issue of public importance as is required for the balance standard to apply, ‘significant viewpoints were included on this issue in the 1 News report including that of several [protesters] and the Prime Minister.’
• In any event, the particular issue raised by the protester of concern, that ‘the vaccine is an experimental trial to 2023’ was not ‘discussed’ as such during the broadcast, as is required for the balance standard to apply.
• Viewers could reasonably be expected to be aware of opposing views concerning the safety of the vaccine given that ‘significant viewpoints on the issue of the Pfizer vaccine being safe have been canvassed in the media within the period of interest, almost daily.’
• It was therefore not necessary for the item to include further context or viewpoints in the broadcast.

The standard(s)

[6]  The balance standard¹ states when controversial issues of public importance are discussed in news, current affairs, and factual programmes, broadcasters should make reasonable efforts, or give reasonable opportunities, to present significant points of view. This can be in the same programme or in other programmes within the period of current interest. The purpose of this standard is to ensure competing viewpoints about significant issues are presented to enable the audience to come to an informed and reasoned opinion.²

Our analysis

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

[8]  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.³

[9]  A number of criteria must be satisfied before the requirement to present significant alternative viewpoints is triggered. The standard applies only to ‘news, current affairs and factual programmes’ which discuss controversial issues of public importance. The subject matter must be an issue of ‘public importance,’ it must be ‘controversial,’ and it must be ‘discussed.’⁴

[10]  The Authority has typically defined an issue of public importance as something that would have ‘significant potential impact on, or be of concern to, members of the New Zealand public.’ A controversial issue is one which has topical currency and excites conflicting opinion or about which there has been ongoing public debate.⁵

[11]  The focus of the broadcast was the disruption caused to the Prime Minister’s engagements by anti-vaccination protests. In that context, it also briefly touched upon issues associated with the merits of the Government’s vaccination rollout (including vaccine mandates for workers in particular sectors). This latter topic is clearly a controversial issue of public importance given the public protests and ongoing debate about various aspects of the rollout.

[12]  However, the complaint is not focused on the particulars of the vaccine rollout/mandates. The particular issue the complainant is arguing was unbalanced concerns the safety of the Pfizer vaccine (ie the views of an epidemiologist or vaccinologist should have been presented to counter the ‘misinformation’ implicit in the ‘experimental’ label). The sole comment on the issue of vaccine safety in the broadcast was that of a protester who was shown and was clearly stating her own personal view.

[13]  For these reasons, we consider the subject matter of concern to the complainant was not ‘discussed’ in the broadcast, and the balance standard does not apply.

[14]  In any event:

• Official advice from the Ministry of Health, which has been widely publicised, is that the Pfizer vaccine is safe and effective.⁶
• The safety of the vaccine has been widely covered in media.

Accordingly, viewers were unlikely to be left misinformed by the omission of alternative perspectives on vaccine safety in this broadcast.

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

Susie Staley
Chair
7 March 2022   

Appendix

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

1  Denise Frost’s original complaint to TVNZ – 5 November 2021

2  TVNZ’s response to complainant – 2 December 2021

3  Frost’s referral to the Authority – 3 December 2021

4  TVNZ confirming no further comments – 27 January 2022

¹ Standard 8 of the Free-to-Air Television Code of Broadcasting Practice
² Commentary: Balance, Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand Codebook, page 18
³ Freedom of Expression: Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand Codebook, page 6
⁴ Guideline 8a
⁵ Commentary: Balance, Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand Codebook, page 18
⁶ Ministry of Health “COVID-19 – Vaccine clinical trials and testing” <www.health.govt.nz>