The situation, as we understand it from RNZ’s own news coverage, is that an RNZ digital journalist had repeatedly changed copy from the news agency Reuters on the war in Ukraine to include pro-Russian content.
Hundreds of stories published by RNZ have been audited, and 16 Reuters stories and one BBC item had to be corrected. Chief executive Paul Thompson says more would be checked “with a fine-tooth comb”.
The digital journalist believed responsible for the edits has been put on leave, pending the outcome of the independent review.
All news agencies that adhere to the New Zealand Media Council are aware of the 12 principles that underpin their work. The first is the need for accuracy, fairness and balance and the last is that significant errors should be promptly corrected.
The Herald, which has a content-sharing arrangement with RNZ, also subscribes to these principles. The Herald has agreements with different agencies to RNZ and did not publish the Reuters articles in question.
There are always lessons to be learned.
Mistakes do sometimes occur, and that is why the Media Council has guidelines for dealing with them. A compounding factor at RNZ is the allegation, again reported by itself, that similar problematic edits had recurred over a length of time.
Some might argue pro-Russian passages in coverage of the war might only be adding balance but the difficulty facing RNZ is in any potential breach in the terms and conditions of its agreement with Reuters. As is standard in such agreements, a client outlet is permitted to edit articles so long as that editing does not “distort the meaning” of the article as provided.
The process of review and correcting articles is well under way at New Zealand’s public-service broadcaster. It is entirely appropriate that the board has convened to oversee the matter and pursue the assurances necessary to reimpose sound practice.
RNZ will need to hold this course to restore public trust.
