Former RNZ employee: "no reason for concern" that RNZ is breaching journalistic standards

Since Israel ramped up its genocide of Palestinians following 7 October 2023, our national broadcaster has been doing its best to carry water for the ethnostate. Defending itself from a flood of complaints from listeners and readers, RNZ has stubbornly allowed that coverage to continue to the present. This month, RNZ published a report that found no major concerns with the way it dealt with these complaints.

“an open and non-defensive attitude”

At the beginning of 2024, I did some digging to find out why RNZ has been so unflinching in its dehumanisation of Palestinian people. I sent a series of requests under the Official Information Act (OIA) for details on its coverage of Gaza, especially internal communications about its editorial policy. In my view, the national broadcaster abrogated its principles under its charter by uncritically reproducing information from its “reliable wire agencies” that dehumanised Palestinians and denied genocide. RNZ was naturally cagey in its response to the OIA, claiming that the only relevant internal correspondence was this leaked email:

When asking to clarify whether RNZ denied this request under s18(e) of the OIA1 its legal advisor responded with a single line “In short we have not denied your request as we have sent you the information we hold.” In this case, the only information was the above email.

Naturally, I was dissatisfied with this response and escalated to the Ombudsman about a year ago. Since then, I have been waiting for a response. The last communications I have received from the Ombudsman was in December, saying that my complaint is awaiting allocation to a dedicated investigator.

“the commonsense traditions of impartial journalism”

As I eagerly wait for a response, RNZ has decided to fire its own shot across the bow, publishing a self-exculpatory report following an assessment of its adherence to its own editorial policy. That RNZ should undertake regular assessments was one of the recommendations of a 2023 review after editor Mick Hall was fired for humanising Palestinians. The assessment was undertaken by former RNZ editorial policy manager Colin Feslier with a scope that included its coverage of Israel and Palestine between October 2023 and July 2024.

It should surprise nobody that Feslier gave his former employer a clean bill of journalistic health. Despite the lack of major concerns, he made 14 recommendations aimed at reducing complaints and allaying concerns. RNZ has accepted 10 of these recommendations in full, partially accepted two and rejected two.

In its own story about its own irreproachability as determined by one of its own guys, RNZ seemed nothing if not emboldened. Colin Peacock’s article is largely comprised of quotes about how accurate, fair and balanced RNZ’s coverage has been. However, he still found space to dab on all the haters. In only the second paragraph, Peacock juxtaposes an “attack” by “Palestinian armed groups” with “the subsequent Israeli response” as if Israel was twiddling its thumbs prior to 7 October. He also takes the opportunity to throw Hall under the bus for publishing “pro-Kremlin garbage.”

Peacock’s article has since been submitted to the Accountability Archive, of journalists, politicians, and public figures endorsing or encouraging the ethnic cleansing of Gaza.

“debunked antisemitic or Islamophobic conspiracy theories”

In the time since the report was published, RNZ has done its best to change absolutely nothing.

In an article last week about Chlöe Swarbrick’s members’ bill, RNZ repeated a debunked Islamophobic conspiracy theory about “reports of widespread rapes” following 7 October. This kind of reporting provides cover for MPs like Chris Bishop who are able to repeat the conspiracy theories with impunity when justifying their own opposition to Swarbrick’s bill.

As my partner pointed out, RNZ’s coverage of white supremacist threats against a Sydney mosque over the weekend included images in which a Palestinian flag was prominent. This is despite the article having nothing to do with Palestine. The intention is clearly to draw parallels between terrorism and Palestine.

“the human instinct to know of events that affect them”

For me, the most telling part of Feslier’s report is this quote from the ‘Background and context’ section:

Israel, as a result of tourism, trade, ‘western’ alignment and language (with English a common first and second language there) have a greater ‘news proximity’ to New Zealand than do Palestinians and Palestine. Stories may be chosen for these reasons and the inevitable result is a stronger perception of news relevance of Israeli stories. Coverage of stories with a Palestinian angle will tend to be less often reported.

My expectations may be low but it’s surprising to see him admit that media has an anti-Palestinian bias and imply that it is for racist reasons. What’s more interesting though, is that this quote comes in the middle of a paragraph on ‘newsworthiness’ and “the human instinct to know of events that affect them.” Given the widespread support for the Palestinian struggle in the west2, the disgust at Israel’s actions3 and the strong English-language proficiency among Palestinian journalists, one could just as easily argue that audiences have a greater ‘news proximity’ to Palestine.

And this point is crucial. RNZ’s journalism isn’t intended to serve audiences. As much as the report may like to cite “concern from ‘both sides’ of the issue”, this concern is much greater in quality and quantity from the side the opposes genocide. I note that one of the recommendations rejected by RNZ is the recommendation that it detail the sources it trusts and those it doesn’t. It’s no secret that much of the broadcaster’s most egregious coverage comes directly from the aforemented wire agencies like Reuters and guys like Peacock may be hoping to downplay this fact.

RNZ’s disgusting coverage is not due to ‘news proficiency’ between the New Zealand public and Israel but the ‘news proficiency’ between RNZ and other western media outlets. And we should demand more from our national broadcaster.

RNZ may not care about you but I do! Consider becoming a paid subscriber.