Not reporting on controversial political issues
Luke made this Official Information request to Radio New Zealand Limited
The request was refused by Radio New Zealand Limited.
From: Luke
Dear Radio New Zealand Limited,
1. Does RNZ support the views of Newsroom editor Mark Jennings when he commented on The Detail: “Quite a lot of talk and discussion in the media, particularly amongst senior editorial people about whether we should even report Winston Peter’s attacks on the media when he says there’s corruption and clearly there’s no basis for that, whether we should all just stick together, and decide not report him”?
2. Has any of the "quite a lot of talk and discussion ... amongst senior editorial people" included persons within RNZ?
3. In the last three years, has RNZ ever engaged in any discussions or conversations of any kind with any news media organisation, where refusing to report on either media corruption, the Treaty, or any other controversial political issue has been discussed?
4. In the last three years, has RNZ ever engaged in any discussions or conversations of any kind either internally or with NZ on Air, where refusing to report on either media corruption, the Treaty, or any other controversial political issue has been discussed?
5. In the last three years, has RNZ ever engaged in any discussions or conversations of any kind with any other organisation, where refusing to report on either media corruption, the Treaty, or any other controversial political issue has been discussed?
6. Please provide a summary, relevant emails, and a transcript of all mentioned above.
7. Does RNZ agree that if major New Zealand media organisations form agreements over what controversial issues to report on and what not to report on, then the outcome has the potential to cause significant harm to the public interest?
8. Why has RNZ not reported on Winston Peter’s allegations of news media corruption, at the same time as several other news media outlets in New Zealand have stopped reporting on it?
9. Has RNZ ever chosen not to report on a controversial political issue in the last three years? If so, what?
10. Other than stories that might breach the BSA and Media Council standards, on what grounds does RNZ deem a story inappropriate to report on?
11. Is RNZ party to any agreement with any other news media organisation which either prevents RNZ from reporting, or materially affects RNZ's reporting on any particular political issue?
Yours faithfully,
Luke
From: RNZ
Radio New Zealand Limited
Kia ora,
Thanks a lot for contacting RNZ.
Please note this general enquiry email address is monitored during normal
working hours but not the evenings, weekends and public holidays.
Your email will be forwarded to the appropriate people at RNZ in due
course however, if your enquiry is urgent, or relates to any of the
following, you may like to use an alternative way of contacting us:
For RNZ programmes:
Visit the programme’s homepage to find out how to contact them directly:
RNZ National https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes
RNZ Concert https://www.rnz.co.nz/concert/programmes
For News tips: [email address]
For website issues:
Email [email address] - for content enquiries
Email [email address] - for technical issues
For radio transmission issues
0800 435 772
Email [email address]
For technical help
Visit our audio help page: https://www.rnz.co.nz/listen/audiohelp
For formal complaints: [1]https://www.rnz.co.nz/complaints
For OIA requests: [email address]
For media enquiries from journalists: [email address]
For publicity enquiries: [email address] Emails sent by Radio New
Zealand Limited (RNZ) or any related entity, including any attachments,
may be confidential, protected by copyright and/or subject to privilege.
If you receive an email from RNZ in error, please inform the sender
immediately, delete it from your system and do not use, copy or disclose
any of the information in that email for any purpose. Emails to/from RNZ
may undergo email filtering and virus scanning, including by third party
contractors. However, RNZ does not guarantee that any email or any
attachment is secure, error-free or free of viruses or other unwanted or
unexpected inclusions. The views expressed in any non-business email are
not necessarily the views of RNZ. www.rnz.co.nz
References
Visible links
1. https://www.rnz.co.nz/complaints
From: FormalComplaints
Radio New Zealand Limited
RNZ acknowledges receipt of your OIA request. Under the Official Information Act 1982 we have 20 working days to respond, and will contact you via email /post. If for any reason our response is delayed due to illness, or pandemic we will advise immediately.
Kind regards
Maggie Hedge| OIA Administrator RNZ
[email address]
show quoted sections
From: George Bignell
Radio New Zealand Limited
Kia ora Luke
Please find below response from RNZ.
You have a right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of
our decision. Information about how to make a complaint is available at
[1]www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or freephone 0800 802 602.
Ngā mihi
George Bignell | Legal Adviser and Procurement Manager
RNZ, PO Box 123, Wellington, New Zealand, 6140
DDI +64 4 474 1424
Mobile: +64 27 491 2246
[2]www.rnz.co.nz
show quoted sections
From: Luke
Dear RNZ,
On February 26, I made an OIA request asking whether RNZ had engaged in any discussions or meetings relating to refusing to report on controversial political issues. You responded on 12 March, and this email is its reply.
12. Please provide a response to questions [1]-[11] which complies with the minimum required of a response to an official information request under s 19(1)(a)(i). That means providing a valid reason for refusal found within the Act. I note that my questions were broader in scope than merely asking for evidence of a document or electronic record. It includes official information held by RNZ (senior editorial officials), which may not necessarily be written down or in electronic form, yet are known by certain RNZ employees.
13. Please also provide the grounds RNZ had in support of any refusal, should all or part of the information request be declined.
14. Please provide a breakdown of RNZ’s decision-making process in responding to questions [1]-[11], for each question. Specifically, please explain:
(a) to whom RNZ officials talked to about this particular information request;
(b) whether RNZ made any efforts to locate the relevant official information;
(c) how RNZ made efforts to locate the relevant official information; and
(d) whether any electronic database(s) were searched.
15. Can RNZ say with certainty that “senior editorial people” at RNZ have never engaged in a discussion, meeting, or any other form of communication between themselves and any other organisation (in their capacity as agents or employees of RNZ), where refusing to report on controversial political issues have been discussed, or were likely, in the circumstances to have been discussed?
16. At question [9], I asked for specific examples where RNZ has chosen not to report on controversial political issues in the last three years. Please list them all. In the event that this is too onerous, please then provide a list of instances most pertinent to the topic of this information request. Namely, times when RNZ deliberately chose not to report on a controversial and significant political issue in New Zealand, which would otherwise have been of interest to a not insignificant number of New Zealanders.
From: Maggie Hedge
Radio New Zealand Limited
Good morning
“RNZ acknowledges receipt of your OIA request. Under the Official Information Act 1982 we have 20 working days to respond and will contact you via email /post. If for any reason our response is delayed we will advise you.”
Kind regards
Maggie Hedge| OIA Administrator RNZ
[email address]
From: Luke <[FOI #25890 email]>
Sent: Tuesday, 12 March 2024 11:50:19 pm (UTC+12:00) Auckland, Wellington
To: George Bignell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] - RE: Official Information request - Not reporting on controversial political issues
Dear RNZ,
On February 26, I made an OIA request asking whether RNZ had engaged in any discussions or meetings relating to refusing to report on controversial political issues. You responded on 12 March, and this email is its reply.
12. Please provide a response to questions [1]-[11] which complies with the minimum required of a response to an official information request under s 19(1)(a)(i). That means providing a valid reason for refusal found within the Act. I note that my questions were broader in scope than merely asking for evidence of a document or electronic record. It includes official information held by RNZ (senior editorial officials), which may not necessarily be written down or in electronic form, yet are known by certain RNZ employees.
13. Please also provide the grounds RNZ had in support of any refusal, should all or part of the information request be declined.
14. Please provide a breakdown of RNZ’s decision-making process in responding to questions [1]-[11], for each question. Specifically, please explain:
(a) to whom RNZ officials talked to about this particular information request;
(b) whether RNZ made any efforts to locate the relevant official information;
(c) how RNZ made efforts to locate the relevant official information; and
(d) whether any electronic database(s) were searched.
15. Can RNZ say with certainty that “senior editorial people” at RNZ have never engaged in a discussion, meeting, or any other form of communication between themselves and any other organisation (in their capacity as agents or employees of RNZ), where refusing to report on controversial political issues have been discussed, or were likely, in the circumstances to have been discussed?
16. At question [9], I asked for specific examples where RNZ has chosen not to report on controversial political issues in the last three years. Please list them all. In the event that this is too onerous, please then provide a list of instances most pertinent to the topic of this information request. Namely, times when RNZ deliberately chose not to report on a controversial and significant political issue in New Zealand, which would otherwise have been of interest to a not insignificant number of New Zealanders.
show quoted sections
From: George Bignell
Radio New Zealand Limited
Kia ora Luke
Please find our response to your OIA below.
You have a right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of
our decision. Information about how to make a complaint is available at
[1]www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or freephone 0800 802 602.
Ngâ mihi
George Bignell
RNZ, PO Box 123, Wellington, New Zealand, 6140
DDI +64 4 474 1424
Mobile: +64 27 491 2246
[2]www.rnz.co.nz
________________________________________
From: Luke <[3][FOI #25890 email]>
Sent: Tuesday, 12 March 2024 11:50:19 pm (UTC+12:00) Auckland, Wellington
To: George Bignell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] - RE: Official Information request - Not reporting on
controversial political issues
Dear RNZ,
On February 26, I made an OIA request asking whether RNZ had engaged in
any discussions or meetings relating to refusing to report on
controversial political issues. You responded on 12 March, and this email
is its reply.
12. Please provide a response to questions [1]-[11] which complies with
the minimum required of a response to an official information request
under s 19(1)(a)(i). That means providing a valid reason for refusal found
within the Act. I note that my questions were broader in scope than merely
asking for evidence of a document or electronic record. It includes
official information held by RNZ (senior editorial officials), which may
not necessarily be written down or in electronic form, yet are known by
certain RNZ employees.
RNZ notes that s 19(1)(a)(i) of the Official Information Act addresses a
situation that when a request for information is refused the organisation
is obliged to give the applicant a “reason for its refusal”. On this
occasion, RNZ has not refused to answer your queries, rather, we have
responded that we do not hold any information relevant to the queries put
in your request.
13. Please also provide the grounds RNZ had in support of any refusal,
should all or part of the information request be declined.
See above.
14. Please provide a breakdown of RNZ’s decision-making process in
responding to questions [1]-[11], for each question. Specifically, please
explain:
(a) to whom RNZ officials talked to about this particular
information request;
(b) whether RNZ made any efforts to locate the relevant official
information;
(c) how RNZ made efforts to locate the relevant official
information; and
(d) whether any electronic database(s) were searched.
Relevant senior managers were consulted before a draft reply to your
earlier OIA was prepared, checked prior to release, and then sent to you.
15. Can RNZ say with certainty that “senior editorial people” at RNZ have
never engaged in a discussion, meeting, or any other form of communication
between themselves and any other organisation (in their capacity as agents
or employees of RNZ), where refusing to report on controversial political
issues have been discussed, or were likely, in the circumstances to have
been discussed?
As far as senior managers consulted are able to recollect, yes.
16. At question [9], I asked for specific examples where RNZ has chosen
not to report on controversial political issues in the last three years.
Please list them all. In the event that this is too onerous, please then
provide a list of instances most pertinent to the topic of this
information request. Namely, times when RNZ deliberately chose not to
report on a controversial and significant political issue in New Zealand,
which would otherwise have been of interest to a not insignificant number
of New Zealanders.
There are no specific examples to provide that RNZ is aware of.
show quoted sections
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence
Offensive? Unsuitable?
Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid requests for Official Information (read more).
If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators
Report this request