30 THE NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE No. 1

But a news situation is different. A spokesman for an organisation
is sought and obtained. Efforts were made to seek the comments
of the Chairman of the Union who was overseas and the President
was interviewed locally. There was no reason to do more.

The complaint is upheld only on the point of accuracy accepted
by the Corporation in Mr Jensen's complaint. It is not upheld in
all other respects.

Co-opted members:
Messrs Boyd-Bell and Ell were co-opted as members of the Tribunal
for the purposes of this complaint. The decision is that of
the permanent members.

Dated the 13th day of December 1982.

Signed for the Tribunal:

B. H. SLANE, Chairman.

Dec. No. 23/82
COM. 20/82

Before the Broadcasting Tribunal

In the matter of the Broadcasting Act 1976, and in the matter of
a complaint by HAROLD EARL JENSEN of Wellington

WARRANT HOLDER BROADCASTING CORPORATION OF NEW
ZEALAND. Television New Zealand, and Radio New Zealand:
B. H. Slane, Chairman; Lionel R. Sceats, Member; Gordon C.
Ell, Co-opted Member; Robert Boyd-Bell, Co-opted Member.

DECISION

Mr Jensen was dissatisfied with the outcome of a complaint to the
Broadcasting Corporation concerning television and radio news
treatment of a farewell function for Mr Lindhorst, retiring Consul
general for the Republic of South Africa. The television news on
Thursday evening, March 11 and Radio New Zealand news on the
morning of Friday March 12 were specific broadcasts complained of.

The allegation was of incorrect statements, bias, and lack of balance. Mr Jensen said it was not a diplomatic evening, it was held
for many hundreds of New Zealand friends representing the majority
of New Zealand sports bodies, business people, and others.

He said that the television and radio news were only interested in “the carryings on of those louts outside the hotel”; no attempt
was made to talk with the several hundred guests”. He said radio
news made great play on the statement made by the Hart leader
and background noises.

He considered it biased, sour, ill-mannered reporting.

The Corporation said:
Inability to provide “balancing” viewpoint cannot be used for
suppression of a story, as long as “reasonable efforts are made to
present significant points of view either in the same programme
or in other programmes within the period of current interest”, as
the Broadcasting Act requires. The Corporation considered that
these efforts had been made, and declined to uphold your complaint on the grounds of bias.

The Corporation did, however, find there had been an error in
fact in television reporting and in 2YA local news when in both
cases there were references to the function being arranged by the
diplomatic community for Mr Lindhorst. As that was incorrect, the
Corporation upheld that part of the complaint in respect of accuracy. The attention of staff had been drawn to the mistakes and the
need for accuracy reinforced.

Mr Jensen did not accept the finding of the Corporation and
referred it to the Tribunal describing it as a “fabricated fob-off on
all counts”. He said that no tangible proof had been produced to
substantiate the statement that staff were debarred from entering
the hotel and speaking to guests, and alleged that that was not the
case. But he produced no evidence to support his statement. He
said that reporters and camera crews had an opportunity to interview guests as there were several hundred.

The Tribunal has had the benefit of viewing the television tape. It does not consider that in the context of the news item the fact
that it was not a diplomatic evening is of any importance beyond
the point of accuracy on which Mr Jensen’s complaint was upheld
by the Corporation.

The Tribunal finds no grounds for upholding the complaint. The
protest was newsworthy, the reporting, except in the respects, stated
did not depart from the recognised standards of objective journalism as to accuracy and impartiality. It is not necessary that balance

be achieved in the same news programme and an attempt to interview those attending the function which would have involved putting questions to them as to why they should attend could well have been considered by a person with Mr Jensen’s viewpoint as provocative and a further indication of bias.

The complaint is not upheld.

Co-opted Members:
Messrs Boyd-Bell & Ell were co-opted as members of the Tribunal for the purposes of this complaint. The decision is that of
the permanent members.

Dated the 13th day of December 1982

Signed for the Tribunal:

B. H. SLANE, Chairman.

Decision No. 22/82
BRO. 49-57/82

Before the Broadcasting Tribunal

In the matter of the Broadcasting Act 1976; and in the matter of
an application by the BROADCASTING CORPORATION OF NEW
ZEALAND for amendments to television warrants to permit
changes to transmission commencement and closing times during
the summer period (Television New Zealand):
B. H. Slane, Chairman; Lionel R. Sceats, Member.

Hearing: Auckland 30 November 1982.

Application:
For warrants 1, 2, 3, and 4: To amend hours of transmission:
Monday-Thursday 1030-2300 hours
Friday 1030-2400 hours
Saturday 0930-2400 hours
Sunday 1100-2300 hours

Hours during which advertising permitted:
Monday-Thursday 1030-2300 hours
Saturday 1000-2400 hours

by deleting the said terms and substituting the following terms, viz:
Hours of transmission:

1. From and including Sunday 26 December 1982 until Saturday
   19 February 1983 the closedown time shall be 0200 hours
   each day.
2. From and including Sunday 26 December 1982 until Friday
   18 February 1983 transmission shall commence at 1200
   hours each day.
3. On Saturday 25 December 1982 transmission shall commence
   at 1100 hours.
4. From and including Saturday 19 February 1983 the transmission hours specified in the warrant shall be observed.

Hours during which advertising permitted:
Throughout the amended hours of transmission on Monday to
Thursday and Saturday.

The effect of the amendments if granted will be to enable Network One Television New Zealand to vary the hours of transmission during the summer holiday period.

For warrants 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9: To amend hours of transmission:
Monday-Friday 1430-2400 hours
Saturday, Sunday 1200-2400 hours

Hours during which advertising permitted:
Monday-Friday 1430-2400 hours

by deleting the said terms and substituting the following terms, viz:
Hours of transmission:

1. From and including Sunday 26 December 1982 until Friday
   18 February 1983 the closedown time shall be 2300 hours
   each day.
2. From and including Sunday 26 December 1982 until Friday
   18 February 1983 transmission shall commence at 1430
   hours each day.

Hours during which advertising permitted:
Throughout the amended hours of transmission on Monday to
Friday.

The effect of the amendments if granted will be to enable Network Two Television New Zealand to vary the hours of transmission during the summer holiday period.

Further amendment applied for:
Friday 31 December 1982, 2300 hours to Saturday 1 January
1983 at 0200 hours, with advertising to be included from 0000
hours on Saturday.