A review into TVNZ’s editorial controls has made 11 recommendations to help overcome “potential vulnerabilities” and prevent the state broadcaster from falling victim to rogue or inappropriate editing of stories, or wayward live interviews.
TVNZ commissioned its general counsel - and now acting CEO - Brent McAnulty to review itseditorial processes in June, following revelations of a scandal at RNZ in which it was found a staff member made inappropriate edits to website articles, including the addition of pro-Kremlin content to Russia-Ukraine war stories.
TVNZ was not directly impacted by the RNZ situation, said the review, but TVNZ management felt it was “prudent” to review newsroom practices, “particularly as TVNZ has its own licensing arrangements with wire agencies, to ensure that all was being done to prevent a similar situation arising at TVNZ”.
Most of New Zealand’s major newsrooms are believed to have reviewed their systems in the wake of the RNZ saga.
The TVNZ review found the TV broadcaster’s systems were “robust and fit for purpose” but “some potential vulnerabilities were evident”.
McAnulty says his recommendations “have been suggested to strengthen the good practices already evident” within TVNZ’s news and current affairs department.
He makes a comment at the conclusion of his report: “On several occasions, it was remarked upon how trust is built over a long period of time, yet can be eroded so quickly. This should never be forgotten.”
His review makes 11 recommendations including a final check by a senior editor on all wire copy sourced from an overseas agency, before it is published on 1news.co.nz.
TVNZ has deals for wire content with the likes of the BBC, Associated Press, Reuters and Nine (Australia).
“The international news agencies allow for wire content to be edited for length, formatting requirements or be combined with other content, provided the original editorial meaning and integrity of the wire content is not altered, distorted or impaired,” says the review. “All Digital News team members are trained and expected to only make edits for such purposes.”
The review discusses the presence of “unavoidable vulnerabilities”.
“No system is foolproof. Every time a piece of content is made available to viewers there is one person responsible for taking the final step in making the content available.
“It is somewhat obvious but there is nothing that can be done to prevent a rogue employee who has the final responsibility to upload content (be it for digital or broadcast platforms) from subverting the process and making their own editorial decisions or uploading content that has not gone through the correct sub-editing process.”
Live interviews
The review also considers other scenarios in the broadcast environment, including live interviews.
It recognises that the nature of such interviews means “anything can happen, and people can make errors”.
“This is an unavoidable risk in a live environment, but can be managed with planning, preparation, and training.”
It recommends: “For live interviews, presenters and reporters should be reminded of the strategies to use to counter/challenge interviewees, if appropriate, on inaccurate, unfair, unbalanced and/or defamatory statements made by interviewees. Specific training on dealing with misinformation could be helpful.”
Teams should also be reminded that news and legal leaders “should be notified immediately of any potential risk, so an appropriate and swift response can be considered to mitigate any potential damage”.
It says its own foreign correspondents, for live crosses, operate on a high level of trust.
“For 1News at 6, final wording used in live crosses by TVNZ’s foreign correspondents is not reviewed. TVNZ’s foreign correspondents are senior and experienced reporters, and operate on a high level of trust due to the very nature of their roles as foreign correspondents.”
A file image of the TVNZ news and weather presenters in action, in the days when there were two newsreaders.
The review makes a number of recommendations around communication - internally around editorial decisions; dealing with complainants and their issues; and to its audience about any corrections.
The review also looked into editorial processes for Te Karere.
“With Te Karere, there is no formal review of the reporter’s English translation of the script or the presenter’s Māori translation of the intro. However, the report notes the seniority of the Te Karere presenters and their standing as language leaders.”
It recommends: “For Te Karere, consider whether more support/resource is appropriate for language and translation of Te Karere content.”
A TVNZ spokeswoman said all recommendations had either been implemented or were in the process of being implemented.
”For TVNZ, a review into processes and editorial controls felt prudent to ensure that no inappropriate editing could take place across our digital and broadcast stories. We found our systems were strong but there were some small changes we could make to improve the robustness further.”
1. For the Digital News team’s use of wire copy, a final check of all wire copy-sourced articles should take place post-editing by the reporter, and prior to publication. The News Editor or Daily Editor would be best placed to do this. All push notifications using a different headline to the article should also be reviewed by a second person.
2. For 1News at 6, ensure tracks scripted by the Foreign Editor are sub-edited.
3. For Te Karere, consider whether more support/resource is appropriate for language and translation of Te Karere content.
4. For 1News at 6, formalise a review process requiring a sub-edit of VOs [voiceovers] written by the Associate Producer or Line Up Producer.
5. For live interviews, presenters and reporters should be reminded of the strategies to use to counter/challenge interviewees, if appropriate, on inaccurate, unfair, unbalanced and/or defamatory statements made by interviewees. Specific training on dealing with misinformation could be helpful.
6. For live interviews, teams should be reminded that the NCA [news and current affairs] Leadership Team and NCA Legal should be notified immediately of any potential risk, so an appropriate and swift response can be considered to mitigate any potential damage.
7. For the dissemination of editorial decisions, consideration should be given to using a single or a more centralised communication system.
8. For responding to complaints and correspondence, NCA team members who may potentially receive complaints/correspondence should be reminded of the correct channels to share these messages, and that early communication with the Content Compliance Team within Legal & Corporate Affairs ensures TVNZ can comply with its statutory obligations to respond to formal complaints.
9. For responding to complaints and correspondence, NCA Leadership could consider an online corrections page on 1news.co.nz to note any broadcast errors. NCA should continue annotating online stories to signal that copy has changed due to accuracy, fairness, balance or any other issues.
10. For responding to complaints and correspondence, NCA Leadership to consider key word automatic forwarding of emails and correspondence to relevant stakeholders.
11. The existence of TVNZ’s speak up and whistleblowing policies should be made more prominent, including NCA specific messaging, as necessary. NCA people should be aware that these companywide processes are available to them for editorial matters.
