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 segment on 1News about Oranga Tamariki-run bootcamps breached the balance standard. The complainant considered the 1News reporter’s attitude, questioning and body language evidenced a ‘left bias’ and ‘a fair representation of the story’ was not given. The Authority found the balance standard was not breached as the broadcast presented sufficient viewpoints and the audience could reasonably be expected to be aware of additional perspectives from other media coverage. The Authority noted the standard does not direct how questions should be asked or require news to be presented without bias.

Not Upheld: Balance

The broadcast

[1]  A segment during the 6 December 2024 1News broadcast included a discussion on issues with Oranga Tamariki’s Military-Style Academies (MSA), more commonly referred to as ‘bootcamps’ for young offenders.

[2]  The segment opened with the following:

1News presenter:      Set up to help teenagers in trouble, the controversial bootcamp programme is now in trouble itself. Two serious young offenders are on the run from police after attending the military-style academy. One fled from Oranga Tamariki staff at the tangi of another young bootcamp participant who died in a car crash last week, the people in charge facing questions amid calls to scrap the programme. Here’s senior political reporter Benedict Collins.

Benedict Collins:      Ten serious young offenders were sent here to this bootcamp, which the Government insisted would get them back on track. It’s not going according to plan.

[3]  The segment then moves into a description of the incident, before covering statements about the MSA programme by Tusha Penny, Oranga Tamariki’s Youth Justice representative and Karen Chhour, the Minister for Children. The following excerpts are relevant:

Penny:                         And we know [the escape] is not ideal. So immediately we’ve started a review.

Collins [to Chhour]:  This bootcamp’s turning into a bit of a debacle, isn’t it?

Chhour:                      No, I wouldn’t say that.

Collins:                       I mean, two of them are on the run.

Chhour:                      Look, these are young boys, and we’ve never said that there wouldn’t be things that would go wrong with these young boys. They’ve just lost a friend. They’re 15 years old.

Collins:                        You told New Zealanders that this bootcamp was going to get these young offenders back on track. Now they’re on the run.

Chhour:                      It’s not a magic bullet. These are complex cases. This is just another way that we can help these young people to try and be the best that they can be. These are young people.

Collins:                        They’re on the run, Minister.

[interrupting]

Chhour:                      These are young people that are serious repeat youth offenders.

…

Collins:                        These two young offenders who are out on the run right now, if they hurt New Zealanders while they are out on the run, will you resign?  

Chhour:                       Absolutely not. We can't be naïve to think that these young people are not going to have hiccups along the way. And to ask that, ridiculous in my mind.

…

Collins [voiceover]:  Far from getting the young offenders back on track, this bootcamp has gone off the rails.

[4]  Concluding the segment, the reporter made the following comments, during which the on-screen banner read, ‘Bootcamps under fire’ and ‘Labour calls for the bootcamps to end’:

Well, from day one, the Labour Party's been saying that bootcamps are failed experiments and that they just don't work in reducing youth offending. They're seeing these developments as proof they were right all along. They're now urging the Prime Minister, Christopher Luxon, to step in here and put an end to these bootcamps. They're saying it's clear now that these bootcamps are putting vulnerable young people at risk, and they need to end now.

But all year long, we've seen the Government really pushing back against those who say the evidence shows that bootcamps don't work. The Government's been saying that, ‘Hey, this time it will be different. This time we will turn these young offenders’ lives around. We’re really going to use this to reduce youth crime.’

I mean, today's news for the Government is just a PR disaster, but you wouldn't have got that from the Minister in charge of bootcamps in my story there. She's denying that having two dangerous young offenders on the loose is a debacle. She even described it in my story there as a ‘hiccup’.

The complaint

[5]  Keith Smith complained the broadcast breached the balance standard of the Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand because:

• Collins’s reporting style, including his ‘attitude and questioning and body language… clearly showed a left bias’.  
• The segment did not provide ‘a fair representation of the story’ or fairly represent the Government’s efforts to help young offenders through Oranga Tamariki’s bootcamps.

The broadcaster’s response

[6]  Television New Zealand Ltd (TVNZ) did not uphold the complaint for the following reasons:

• ‘Young offenders absconding from the [MSA] program and associated issues, such as other offending of participants’ is a controversial issue of public importance.
• Balance is satisfied when significant viewpoints are adequately represented. This occurred in the 1News story through commentary from Karen Chhour and Tusha Penny.
• Chhour was given an opportunity to respond to the issues raised, allowing viewers the benefit of directly hearing her viewpoint.
• ‘The Senior Political Reporter articulates the criticisms and concerns about the program and reports the viewpoint of the Labour Party on the bootcamp, and the National Party viewpoint on the efficacy of bootcamps.’
• ‘The issue in question is of high public importance and the Senior Political Reporter’s questions to the Minister, in particular about the possibility of danger to the public in having these young offenders abscond, is reasonable and in the public interest.’
• The issue has been widely discussed, and many viewpoints have been represented, with a list of various news stories discussing the issue of bootcamps provided to the Authority and complainant.¹

The standard

[7]  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.² The standard states:³

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.

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 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 placing a limit on the right to freedom of expression is reasonable and justified.⁴

[10]  Several factors must be satisfied before the requirement to present significant alternative viewpoints is triggered. The standard only applies to news, current affairs and factual programmes, which discuss a controversial issue of public importance.

[11]  An issue ‘of public importance’ is 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

[12]  We are satisfied the broadcast discussed a controversial issue of public importance, ie the use of bootcamps to address youth offending and the recent issues experienced with youths absconding. Therefore, the standard applies.

[13]  The next question under the standard is whether the broadcaster presented significant viewpoints regarding this issue either in the same broadcast or in other broadcasts within the period of current interest.

[14]  Balance is not achieved by a ‘stopwatch’. Guideline 5.3 states the standard does not require equal time to be given to each significant viewpoint on a controversial issue, or for each viewpoint to be given an equal number of speakers. Broadcasters should give a fair voice to alternative viewpoints considering the nature of the issue and coverage of that issue.⁶

[15]  We find the broadcast sufficiently presented significant viewpoints:

• It included comments from Oranga Tamariki’s Youth Justice representative Tusha Penny who explained the circumstances of the recent absconding issue and confirmed ‘…immediately we’ve started a review’.
• Minister for Children Karen Chhour’s interview included her perspectives on the nuanced process of providing support for young offenders and their whānau, ie ‘[bootcamps are] not a magic bullet, these are complex cases, this is just another way that we can help these young people try and be the best that they can be’ and later ‘We can’t be naïve to think that these young people are not going to have hiccups along the way’.
• The item’s introduction also made it clear it was focused on the issue of the recent absconding of two young offenders from Oranga Tamariki run bootcamps. It did not purport to be an in-depth examination of the merits of the bootcamps.

[16]  The standard does not require a broadcast to present alternative viewpoints where ‘the audience can reasonably be expected to be aware of significant viewpoints from other media coverage’. In this case, as noted in TVNZ’s submissions, the bootcamps issue has been broadly reported on and we consider the audience is likely to be aware there are other perspectives on the use of bootcamps.

[17]  The complainant also considered Collins’s reporting style, including his ‘attitude and questioning and body language’ demonstrated a ‘left bias’. The balance standard is not intended to direct how questions should be asked and does not require news to be presented impartially or without bias.⁷ In addition, Collins is a senior political reporter and his approach and questions are consistent with him doing his job, rather than demonstrating any particular political affiliation.

[18]  We therefore do not uphold the complaint.

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

Susie Staley
Chair
29 April 2025

Appendix

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

1  Smith’s original complaint – 06 December 2024

2  TVNZ’s decision – 21 January 2025

3  Smith’s referral to the Authority – 17 February 2025

4  TVNZ’s further comments – 07 March 2025

5  Smith’s further comments – 10 March 2025

6  TVNZ’s confirmation of no further comments – 10 March 2025

¹ See Adam Pearse “PM Christopher Luxon adamant bootcamp pilot not a failure, hints at changes after youths absconded” The New Zealand Herald (online ed, 10 December 2024), Jo Moir “‘Unacceptable’: Children’s Minister not told about second boot camp youth absconder” Radio New Zealand (online ed, 6 December 2024), Sam Smith “Police find missing bootcamp teens” Stuff (online ed, 8 December 2024), 1News Reporters “Two youth boot camp pilot absconders found” 1News (online ed, 8 December), Adam Pearse “Two bootcamp teens missing, one ran away from tangi at private home – Oranga Tamariki” NewstalkZB (online ed, 6 December 2024)
² Commentary, Standard 5, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 14
³ Standard 5, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁴ Introduction, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 4
⁵ Guideline 5.1
⁶ Guideline 5.3
⁷ See Garrett and Radio New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2017-079 at [19], Carran and Television New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2021-125 at [18], Commentary: Standard 5, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 14