MediaRoom column: Regulators dismiss 16 of 16 complaints over media reporting of the visit of anti-trans activist Posie Parker
The Media Council and Broadcasting Standards Authority ruled out or did not uphold all published complaints made against coverage of the visit and protests over activist Posie Parker.
Parker, whose real name is Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, visited Auckland in March but had to abandon an Albert Park rally due to counter protest against her anti-trans views. She was covered in tomato juice, surrounded by a crowd as police and security escorted her from the park and proceeded to leave New Zealand with a hail of social media criticism.
The standards organisations ruled it was not unfair to call Parker "anti trans gender" (Media Council), and "anti-trans right activist" or a "trans-exclusionary speaker" (BSA) and in any case media were free to use descriptors that they chose so long as they did not breach the bodies' rules.
The Media Council found it was accurate to report on Nazis supporting her at a rally in Melbourne before the Auckland visit, to note Nazi salutes from some at Albert Park, and the BSA ruled it did not breach standards to say neo-Nazis 'supported' Parker at a previous rally.
In a wave of rulings published between May and August, the two standards regulators backed media companies' arguments over complainants who alleged journalists failed to adhere to standards on a wide variety of principles.
For the nine failed complaints to the Media Council, journalists were accused but cleared of breaching principles of accuracy, fairness and balance, comment and fact, subterfuge, corrections, discrimination and diversity, headlines and captions, conflict of interest, and columns, blogs, opinion and letters.
For the seven dismissed by the BSA, allegations had included lack of balance, fairness, and accuracy, discrimination and denigration, as well as promotion of illegal or antisocial behaviour, and a complaint over the response of a media company to an original complaint.
One complainant claimed the New Zealand Herald coverage had whipped up hate and incited violence.
The NZ Herald was cleared in five Media Council complaints, Stuff two, and TVNZ and RNZ one each. At the BSA, TVNZ, MediaWorks Radio and Discovery TV had faced two complaints and NZME Radio one. One element of the Discovery complaint was resolved ahead of the BSA consideration by the broadcaster accepting it should change a potentially misleading video clip of Parker but the remainder of the complaint, on five other grounds, was not upheld by the authority.
In most instances the regulators found coverage that focused on opposition to Parker's views and visit was balanced over time with reporting on her previous statements and events, and they ruled those justified the labels of anti-trans and trans-exclusionary. It was for editors to choose what opinions appeared on their platforms or channels.
However the coverage didn't escape comment from the Media Council in a number of decisions.
In a ruling not upholding a complaint from Fern Hickson against RNZ, issued on August 7, the council notes "there was no indication any anti-trans people were approached for comment" or any effort made to consider "the possibility that threats might also have been made against anti-trans activists".
"As a result, the story, as originally published, appeared to be one-sided and it drew 27 complaints."
Because RNZ acted relatively quickly (the next day) in amending the story to show threats might not be solely directed at the rainbow community, the complaint was not upheld.
"Clearly the Media Council has some concerns about the handling of this story. That made it a close call as to whether or not the complaint should be upheld but on balance the council found it did not breach its principles."
An earlier, substantive, decision by the council for a complaint by Natasha Hamilton-Hart against the Herald which cited 50 articles over a period of nine days around the Parker visit, said it was "disappointing" that while 15 opinion pieces ran in the paper and its site, it was "unable or unwilling to find someone to wrestle with the issues raised by the complainant".
It did not uphold the Hamilton-Hart case because Media Council principles allowed for fairness over a longer time frame – and nine days was "not sufficient time to judge the Herald as failing in this matter".
* The 16 complaints are those for which rulings have been published on the two regulators' websites since the March visit. This story has been updated to note DiscoveryTV (Newshub) itself replaced a video clip of Parker during the complaint process but the rest of the complaint grounds against it were not upheld by the BSA.
