The NZ Media Council upheld three complaints against NZME.
The NZ Media Council upheld three complaints against NZME.
The Media Council received three complaints about two NZME articles published on July 21 this year: Siouxsie Wiles documentary receives $20,000 of taxpayer money (Newstalk ZB) and Taxpayers fund Dr Siouxsie Wiles documentary (New Zealand Herald).
Dr Siouxsie Wiles, Ms Andi Brotherston and Mr Frank Macskasy complained these articles containeda core inaccuracy about the NZ Film Commission funding of $20,000 which was for preliminary work on a potential film about Dr Wiles, not for an eight-minute documentary about Dr Wiles as suggested. The cost of the documentary was $6000.
Dr Wiles said the articles failed to clarify that she did not receive any of the funding for the documentary, she was not involved in any of the funding decisions nor did it say the funding had been granted in 2020. Dr Wiles also complained it was unfair and disingenuous to equate funding for the documentary with NZ’s overwhelmed hospitals.
The complainants said following publication of the articles Dr Wiles received abusive emails and messages on social media accusing her of receiving the funding personally and of not caring about the health service. Dr Wiles also complained NZME did not contact her for comment.
In response NZME said, when alerted to the unintended errors, it promptly removed the articles from the Newstalk ZB and NZ Herald websites and associated social media platforms. It published an apology and correction on both websites and broadcast a correction and apology on Newstalk ZB. It also wrote to Dr Wiles and the producers for the inadvertent error and the editor of the NZ Herald personally apologised to Dr Wiles for unintended hurt and distress.
While the Media Council found NZME’s correction and apology adequately addressed the main inaccuracy of the amount and source of funding for the documentary, it upheld the complaints under principle (1) because the correction and apology did not address the failure of the Newstalk ZB article to say when the documentary was made and published and because of the delay in publishing the correction and apology.
The Media Council found NZME’s correction and apology adequately addressed the main inaccuracy of the amount and source of funding for the documentary and not seeking Dr Wiles’ comment did not make the articles unfair. However, it upheld the complaints under principle (1) because the correction and apology did not address the failure of the Newstalk ZB article to say when the documentary was made and published and because of the delay in publishing the correction and apology.
