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 segment was unbalanced in its reporting of ‘anti-government protests’ in Iran. The complaint was that the broadcast should have mentioned what the complainant considered to be external drivers, including the interests and past actions of other nations. The Authority found the broadcast was clearly focused on the current protest situation (including that it was hard to determine exactly what was happening because of the internet blackout in Iran); and the perspective of those gathered in Auckland in solidarity with the Iranian community, on the evening of the broadcast. The omission of the factors identified in the original complaint did not render the broadcast unbalanced or misleading. No allegation was made in the original complaint of unfairness to a particular individual or organisation taking part or referred to in the broadcast.

Not Upheld: Balance, Accuracy, Fairness

The broadcast 

[1]  An item on 1News, broadcast on 10 January 2026, reported on ‘anti-government protests’ in Iran and an Iranian community gathering in Auckland that evening. It comprised an introduction from the 1News presenter, a pre-recorded item from a BBC reporter, and a live cross to a 1News reporter in Aotea Square, Auckland, as follows (in its entirety):

1News presenter:      The Iran Supreme Leader has vowed authorities won’t back down as anti-government protests stretch into a 13th day. New footage of demonstrations has emerged despite an internet blackout across the Islamic Republic country, but it is hard to establish exactly what is going on. BBC’s [reporter] has the latest.

BBC reporter:            New videos posted on social media show huge numbers of people back on the streets, whole families in some cases, driven by anger, and, after decades of repressive theocratic rule, determined to try to bring change. State-run television today showed the aftermath of last night’s protests, in which some buildings and vehicles were set on fire. What started in late December as an economic protest has quickly spiralled into a major political and security challenge for the government – a crisis Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei felt he had to address, and he was characteristically uncompromising.

Ayatollah Khamenei: 

[translated in voiceover] Last night in Tehran and some other places, a bunch of vandals showed up and destroyed buildings belonging to their own country, just to please the US President.

BBC reporter:            Today, counter-demonstrations were staged by the authorities in several cities, designed as a very public show of support. They’re chanting here that they’re at the service of Ayatollah Khamenei. There’s no organised opposition to him within Iran, but there is the son of this man, the last monarch, the Shah, deposed back in 1979. The Crown Prince, Reza Pahlavi, has lived in exile ever since. Now, he’s calling on Iranians from both outside the country and within to make common cause.

Reza Pahlavi:             [translated in voiceover] Let us, at this time, work hand in hand to deal the final blow to the regime, achieve freedom and rebuild our country. Take care. Long live Iran. 

BBC reporter:            It’s impossible to know what’s happening across Iran because of the internet blackout, but people are finding inventive ways to get images out. And in many parts of the country, we know that protests have been taking place.

Middle East commentator: 

So I think the protests are likely to continue for a little while, and they’re going to put enough pressure that the Islamic Republic, as we know it today, is unlikely to survive to see 2027. It doesn’t have to be a regime change. It doesn’t have to be the complete collapse of the Islamic republic, though that is still possible…

BBC reporter:            As the regime tries to assert control, there are reports the security forces have intensified a lethal crackdown. One doctor in Tehran told BBC Persian that hospitals are treating dozens of protesters with bullet wounds and hundreds shot in the eye with pellets.

1News presenter:      And a peaceful gathering is being held by the local Iranian community in Auckland tonight. [1News reporter] is there and she joins us live. … what’s happening there?

1News reporter:        …well, people began assembling here at Aotea Square just after 5.30pm with a few hundred people expected here at tonight’s event. Now this gathering is being held in response to the large protests taking place across Iran with Iranian Kiwis determined to stand in solidarity and also raise awareness for what they’ve described as human rights abuses by the Iranian regime. Now many of those here still have family members who live in Iran who they haven’t been able to get in contact with since the internet blackout so there is a lot of concern and uncertainty amongst the local community. We’ve also heard of some people who decided not to attend tonight’s event out of fear of potential repercussions for their family members back home. We spoke to a few people beforehand, here’s what they had to say.

Interviewee 1:            [Onscreen banner: Iran protest vigil. Dozens gather in Aotea Square to support Iranian protests.] We’re just here to support the people who are just uprising now in Iran, and they are risking their life. And we have got almost more than [a] hundred people just been killed during the last two weeks.

Interviewee 2:            I hardly slept the last two nights, really. I was so much worried for them. I couldn’t talk to my mum for 48 hours. I don’t know what is happening there, yeah. 

1News reporter:        Iranian Kiwis also have a message for our government. They want New Zealand to take a strong stance against the Iranian regime. Now tonight’s protest will continue for the next hour.

The complaint

[2]  Paul Martin complained the broadcast breached the accuracy, balance and fairness standards of the Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand.

[3]  The complaint was that the BBC report and ‘subsequent report from the New Zealand diaspora’ were ‘unbalanced’ and ‘propaganda designed to influence the viewer to see the situation in one light only’, because they did not mention:

a)  ‘almost 50 years of devastating sanctions by the US (and the rest of the West) with the deliberate intent to destabilise the current government in Iran’

b)  UK interests in regaining ownership of Iranian oil

c)  the current well-documented destabilisation of Iran through the training, resourcing and funding of the many violent protestors (who have killed at least 10 Iranian policemen and burned mosques) by Israel and the US as a prelude to imminent further war against Iran

d)  any diaspora is, by definition, dissatisfied with the government they have fled from.

[4]  The complaint concluded, ‘Honesty and balance to ensure viewers can make up their OWN minds about a given global situation is vital if we are to be truly a democratic country.’

[5]  Responding to the broadcaster’s submission that the protests in Iran are not a ‘controversial issue of public importance’ in New Zealand for the purposes of the balance standard, the complainant said, ‘This is a flawed and dangerous interpretation,’ because:

a)  The local protest at Aotea Square demonstrated ‘direct concern and impact on the New Zealand public, particularly the Iranian-Kiwi diaspora’.

b)  ‘Iran is a major global actor. Instability or conflict involving Iran, the US, and Israel has immense potential impact on global oil prices, security, and New Zealand’s economic interests.’

[6]  Responding to Television New Zealand Ltd’s (TVNZ) submission that other news outlets had frequently reported on the situation in Iran, the complainant said, ‘like almost all Western mainstream media, [these outlets] have also deliberately chosen to not include relevant context to these ongoing attacks by Israel and the US’.

The broadcaster’s response

[7]  TVNZ did not uphold the complaint for the following reasons.

Balance

[8]  TVNZ did not agree the protests in Iran were a controversial issue of public importance to which the standard applied; while acknowledging it is of interest and concern, it did not agree there has been ongoing debate about this issue.

[9]  The matters raised in the complaint were not what was being discussed in the 1News item which solely focused on the protests happening now and the regime’s reactions to this. ‘It is acceptable for a news item to have a defined focus as this one does.’

[10]  The Authority has previously held that ‘…a programme can be an advocacy piece and it can be unbalanced and it can give information that is incomplete, so long as the nature of the programme and its purpose is obvious, and there is other balancing information available to the viewer or listener. That other information can come from a variety of other sources or places. It may be found in other broadcasts at around the same time, it may be in newspapers or elsewhere. It may be something which is visible to everybody in the universe of information.’¹ Information about the protests in Iran was available in a number of reports including by the NZ Herald, Stuff and RNZ. 1News also continues to publish and broadcast stories about this issue.²

Accuracy

[11]  Responding to the complaint that, ‘TVNZ needs to also note to its viewers […] that ANY diaspora is by definition dissatisfied with the government they have fled from,’ TVNZ said the perspective of the New Zealand protestors was made clear in the item. It did not agree ‘viewers would be confused or misled by this’.

Fairness

[12]  This standard is designed to protect people and organisations taking part or referred to in a broadcast. The complaint made no allegation in this regard.

The complaint referral – additional submissions

[13]  On referring the complaint to the Authority, the complainant raised additional points under each of the standards, summarised below:

Balance

[14]  By omitting ‘documented economic warfare’, for example the US Treasury Secretary’s ‘admission of engineering a rial [currency] collapse’, 1News ‘presented a one-sided narrative that failed to provide the audience with the necessary context to understand the causes of the unrest’.

Accuracy

[15]  The broadcast contained material omissions and inaccuracies, and ignored vital context:

a)  The report attributed the protests primarily to ‘repressive theocratic rule’ while ignoring the immediate and documented economic triggers including admission by US officials of engineering a currency collapse (and – as mentioned in the original complaint – decades of ‘extreme illegal sanctions imposed on Iran by the West which have caused huge economic hardship to the Iranian population’). ‘This creates a misleading impression that the unrest was purely internal and spontaneous.’

b)  It did not mention violence by the protestors (including ‘use of guns on civilians by protesters, burning of civilians, burning of mosques, banks and shops’), or that ‘Ayatollah [Khamenei] and his representatives had in fact said that legitimate protests would be respected, but that violent protects would not be.’

c)  ‘While the report focused on the “regime’s reactions”, it failed to mention credible reports and admissions regarding foreign intelligence involvement’ (including admissions by the Israeli Mossad and the CIA of direct involvement with violent protestors – mentioned more broadly in the original complaint), ‘nor that both the US and Israel had most recently murdered many Iranian scientists and their families, and attempted to overthrow the Iranian government with bombing in the 12-Day war.’ ‘Omitting this information misleads the audience about the complexity and external drivers of the conflict.’

d)  There was ‘no mention of the fact that Pahlavi, the son of the ex-brutal dictator, the Shah, has NO legitimacy in Iran’.

e)  By relying almost solely on the BBC and ‘diaspora sources’ and not seeking comment from the Iranian Embassy or independent international experts, the broadcaster did not make reasonable efforts to ensure accuracy and balance.

f)  These omissions were not ‘technical or unimportant’ but material to the audience’s understanding of a major international event with direct local relevance. They are ‘well documented facts and noted by very reputable independent commentators’ (the complainant named three commentators but did not otherwise provide sources or evidence in support).

g)  ‘ALL of these omissions are a clear indication that 1News made no attempt at all to disseminate news that explained what was really happening and why,’ and reflect a ‘deliberate misrepresentation of the facts on the ground’.

Fairness

[16]  The complainant noted TVNZ dismissed this standard claiming no allegation was made. However, the complainant submitted:

a)  The lack of ‘fair and reasonable opportunity to comment’ for the party being criticised (the Iranian government/embassy) is a fundamental fairness issue.

b)  1News presented a highly critical report without evidence of attempting to contact the Iranian Embassy for a response to specific allegations of ‘human rights abuses’.³

c)  By presenting only the views of the diaspora and Western-aligned media (BBC), the programme left the audience with an ‘unfairly negative impression’⁴ that was not tempered by any official or alternative perspective.

[17]  Our task is to review the broadcaster’s decision on the original complaint. The original complaint alleged the broadcast was ‘unbalanced’ and ‘designed to influence the viewer to see the situation in one light only’, identifying four points the complainant considered ought to have been included (listed in paragraph [3] above). To the extent that may also be read as alleging the item was misleading by omitting those points, that is addressed under the accuracy standard.

[18]  The original complaint nominated the fairness standard but did not allege a particular ‘individual or organisation taking part or referred to’ in the broadcast was treated unfairly or not given a fair and reasonable opportunity to comment. The standard also does not address ‘fairness’ to the audience or whether facts or issues are ‘fairly’ conveyed – which is better addressed under the balance or accuracy standards.⁵

[19]  Accordingly, while we have noted the complainant’s further detailed submissions above, as they do not affect our overall view, and the broadcaster did not have the opportunity to specifically consider them when responding to the initial complaint, we do not address them (or the fairness standard) further in our decision below.

The relevant standards

[20]  The purpose of the balance standard (standard 5) is to ensure competing viewpoints about significant issues are available, to enable the audience to arrive at an informed and reasoned opinion.⁶ The standard states:⁷

When controversial issues of public importance are discussed in news, current affairs or factual programmes, broadcasters should make reasonable efforts, or give reasonable opportunities, to present significant viewpoints either in the same broadcast or in other broadcasts within the period of current interest unless the audience can reasonably be expected to be aware of significant viewpoints from other media coverage.

[21]  The purpose of the accuracy standard (standard 6) is to protect the public from being significantly misinformed.⁸ The standard states:⁹

• 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

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

[23]  As a starting point, we considered the right to freedom of expression. It is our role to weigh the right to freedom of expression and the value and public interest in the broadcast, against any harm potentially caused by the broadcast. We may only intervene where the level of harm means that placing a limit on the right to freedom of expression is reasonable and justified.¹⁰

Balance

[24]  For the balance standard to apply, the programme must be ‘news, current affairs or factual’ and the subject matter must be an issue of ‘public importance’, it must be ‘controversial’, and it must be ‘discussed’.¹¹

[25]  The situation in Iran is clearly of concern and importance to the New Zealand public and carries significant public interest. We also acknowledge the complainant’s view that any conflict in the region has potential global impact. Evident from the response in the local Iranian community, we consider the protests had sufficiently generated discourse and debate, for this item to amount to a discussion of a controversial issue of public importance. We therefore consider the standard applies.

[26]  However, the standard recognises that the requirement to present significant points of view is likely to be reduced, or in some cases negated, where it is clear from the programme’s introduction and the way in which the programme is presented, that the programme is not claiming, or intended, to be a balanced examination of an issue.¹² This broadcast did not purport to offer an in-depth or balanced examination of the narrower issue of alleged external drivers or geopolitical factors that may have contributed to the protests. The item was clearly framed as providing a snapshot of reaction to the current protests – including authorities’ response to and reported ‘lethal crackdown’ on the continued protests and the difficulty of getting the full picture due to the internet blackout; and the community event in Auckland:

1News presenter:      The Iran Supreme Leader has vowed authorities won’t back down as anti-government protests stretch into a 13th day. New footage of demonstrations has emerged despite an internet blackout across the Islamic Republic country, but it is hard to establish exactly what is going on.

…

1News presenter:      And a peaceful gathering is being held by the local Iranian community in Auckland tonight…

1News reporter:        …Now this gathering is being held in response to the large protests taking place across Iran with Iranian Kiwis determined to stand in solidarity and also raise awareness for what they’ve described as human rights abuses by the Iranian regime…

[27]  The broadcast provided a reasonable range of viewpoints within this context, including:

a)  comment from Iran’s Supreme Leader, including his view that some actions of the protestors were ‘just to please the US President’

b)  reporting counter-demonstrations by authorities, ‘designed as a very public show of support. They’re chanting here that they’re at the service of [Iran Supreme Leader] Ayatollah Khamenei’

c)  comment from the Iranian Crown Prince, Reza Pahlavi

d)  a Middle East commentator’s view that with continued pressure on the Islamic Republic, it was ‘unlikely to survive’ to see 2027

e)  a doctor in Tehran saying hospitals were dealing with many injured protestors, following the reported ‘lethal crackdown’ by authorities

f)  the perspectives of those gathering in Auckland, including that they were there to stand in solidarity with the protestors and to ‘raise awareness for what they’ve described as human rights abuses by the Iranian regime’ (reporter); ‘support[ing] the people who are just uprising now in Iran, and they are risking their life’ (attendee); worried for family and others in Iran who were not contactable; and had ‘a message for our government. They want New Zealand to take a strong stance against the Iranian regime’ (reporter).

[28]  Further, the standard allows for balance to be achieved over time, within the period of current interest. It does not require every significant viewpoint to be presented in every programme that discusses a particular controversial issue of public importance.¹³ The standard takes a commonsense approach, in recognition of the proliferation of information and sources readily available to New Zealand audiences.¹⁴ Developments in the situation in Iran – including in relation to the involvement of the US and Israel – have been the subject of regular, ongoing coverage both by TVNZ and other news outlets.¹⁵ Broadcasters are entitled to update viewers on the latest developments, or to present items from a particular angle or perspective, without being required to provide detailed background in every broadcast.¹⁶

[29]  For these reasons, we have not found actual or potential harm at a level justifying regulatory intervention or restricting the broadcaster’s right to freedom of expression, and we do not uphold the complaint under the balance standard.

Accuracy

[30]  Determination of a complaint under the accuracy standard occurs in two steps. The first step is to consider whether the programme was materially inaccurate or misleading. The second step is to consider whether the broadcaster made reasonable efforts to ensure the programme was accurate and did not mislead. To ‘mislead’ is defined as giving a wrong idea or impression of the facts.

[31]  The standard is concerned only with material points; it is not concerned with technical or other points unlikely to significantly affect the audience’s understanding of the content as a whole.¹⁷

[32]  For similar reasons to those discussed above under balance, we do not consider the item was materially misleading by omitting the points identified in the complaint (at paragraph [3]).

[33]  The first section of the story was an update on the current situation in Iran with protests entering their thirteenth day, and the reaction from Iran’s Supreme Leader and authorities. It was acknowledged by both the 1News presenter and the BBC reporter that the facts of exactly what was happening were difficult to establish given the internet blackout. The second part of the story took a localised focus, crossing live to an Iranian community gathering in Auckland. It was clearly presented from the perspectives of those in attendance, including their motivations for attending (standing in solidarity for those protesting in Iran) and concerns for family in Iran.

[34]  It was not misleading for the broadcast not to deliver an in-depth examination of all of the alleged drivers or contributing factors leading up to the protests. The comment from Iran’s Supreme Leader included his view some of the protestors’ actions (including the destruction of buildings) were ‘just to please the US President’, signalling the existence of external factors or influences.

[35]  Nor was it necessary to explain, as submitted by the complainant, that ‘any diaspora is by definition dissatisfied with the government they have fled from’. Viewers could hear the perspectives of the attendees at the Auckland event – as paraphrased by the reporter and directly from two attendees interviewed – and assess their motivations for themselves.

[36]  Additionally, developments in Iran are ongoing and frequently reported, minimising the likelihood anyone would be materially misled by a single item or statement.¹⁸

[37]  We therefore do not consider the broadcast was materially misleading or caused harm justifying restriction of the broadcaster’s freedom of expression. We do not uphold the complaint under the accuracy standard.

For the above reasons the Authority does not uphold the complaint. 

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Susie Staley
Chair
10 June 2026    

Appendix

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

1  Martin’s original complaint – 10 January 2026

2  TVNZ’s decision – 11 February 2026

3  Martin’s referral to the Authority – 13 February 2026

4  TVNZ’s response to the referral – 23 March 2026

5  Martin’s further comments – 24 March 2026

¹ McMillan and Television New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2013-025 at [29]
² TVNZ cited nine online articles published on 1News’ website, including: 1News Reporters “NZ closes embassy in Iran, evacuates staff as threat escalates” 1News (online ed, 16 January 2026). The remaining eight article links cited by TVNZ have expired, but on request from the Authority TVNZ provided the following links to the corresponding Associated Press stories: Elena Becatoros “Iran’s leader acknowledges ‘several thousand’ protesters” Associated Press (online ed, January 18 2026); Jon Gambrell “Hackers disrupt Iran state TV to support exiled crown prince” Associated Press (online ed, January 20 2026); 
Stephanie Liechtenstein “Crisis in Iran carries potential nuclear risks, warn analysts” Associated Press (online ed, January 20 2026); Jon Gambrell “Trump says ‘time is running out’ for Iran to ‘come to the table’” Associated Press (online ed, January 29 2026); Jon Gambrell “Iran’s supreme leader warns US attack would spark ‘regional war’” Associated Press (online ed, February 2 2026); Konstantin Toropin and 
Farnoush Amiri “US shoots down Iranian drone that ‘aggressively’ approached aircraft carrier” Associated Press (online ed, February 4 2026); Jon Gambrell “Iran and US to hold nuclear talks as tensions remain high” Associated Press (online ed, February 5 2026); and Sarah El Deeb “She filmed Iran’s protester crackdown. Now she’s afraid to go outside” Associated Press (online ed, February 8 2026). In later submissions, TVNZ also pointed to related 1News bulletins on 2, 14, 17 and 28 January 2026.
³ Citing Guideline 8.4: Fairness, Code of Broadcasting standards in New Zealand, page 20
⁴ Citing Guideline 8.1: Fairness, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 19
⁵ Commentary: Fairness, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 20
⁶ Commentary: Balance, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 14
⁷ Standard 5: Balance, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁸ Commentary: Accuracy, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 16
⁹ Standard 6: Accuracy, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
¹⁰ Introduction, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 4
¹¹ Guideline 5.1: Balance, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 14
¹² Guideline 5.4: Balance, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 14
¹³ Guideline 5.2: Balance, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 14
¹⁴ Commentary: Balance, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 15
¹⁵ Examples of TVNZ’s other coverage are listed above at n 2. Examples of other NZ outlets’ coverage around the time of this 1News broadcast include: Stuart Williams Agence France-Presse “Iran protests: Dozens killed as nationwide internet shutdown imposed” NZ Herald (online ed, 10 January 2026); and Mostafa Salem CNN “Why are Iranians protesting and what does it mean for the regime?” RNZ (online ed, 11 January 2026)
¹⁶ For a similar finding, see Sharifi and Radio New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2025-036; and Minto and Television New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2025-082 at [20]
¹⁷ Guideline 6.2: Accuracy, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 15
¹⁸ For a similar finding, see Minto and Television New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2025-027 at [15]