Alan Cocker: If it looks like a party political ad ...

It is a mistake for TVNZ to use Mr English in this role and he really should not have taken advantage of it. Photo / Supplied

Opinion

The controversy over the promotions being run for a new TVNZ 7 programme Focus on the Economy brings to mind the adage: "When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."

The promotions fronted by the Minister of Finance Bill English for the programme look like party political broadcasts and sound like party political broadcasts. As mentioned they are reminiscent of the National Party political advertising featuring Bill English before the 2002 General Election, except that these latter efforts can be judged more successful.

Mr English looks more comfortable than he did in the 2002 political broadcasts, and so he should, the positive images and chance to push his good news message coming after some weeks of criticism surrounding his ministerial housing allowances.

TVNZ's marketing department have provided timely spots of image rehabilitation with very high production values which would otherwise have cost the National Party many hundreds of thousands of dollars.

After weeks of negative publicity, the minister obviously saw this promotional opportunity as fortuitously redressing the balance. As Gerry Brownlee replying to critical questions on his behalf stated in Parliament: "I simply say that sometimes one cannot help good luck."

One can understand Bill English taking advantage of the opportunity but it does show disturbing aspects of the relationship between our politicians and broadcasters.

The separation between the politicians and the fourth estate, the media, is traditionally one of tension with the fourth estate taking the role on behalf of the public of holding the politicians to account. This is accepted as an essential element of a healthy democracy.

Given the sensitivity around the use of the media by politicians, it is a mistake for TVNZ to use Mr English in this role and he really should not have taken advantage of it.

Broadcasting guidelines have long stressed the need to avoid a politician gaining unfair advantage by appearances on the screen as there is a need to preserve due impartiality in appearance as well as in reality. However non-partisan and objective the onscreen deportment of such a person, it might be difficult for viewers to accept as truly impartial a programme or promotion presented by him/her on a matter of current political or industrial contention.

In Britain, the BBC has to be extremely careful with its broadcasts involving politicians so as "not to give them such prominence as to give them undue advantage over their opponents".

In TVNZ's case there should be some thought given to appointing someone within the organisation who could advise the marketing department on when it is or is not appropriate to have input from politicians.

New Zealand does not have a happy record when looking at the independent democratic role of our broadcasting entities.

In 1935 the Labour Government brought broadcasting under direct ministerial control. It justified this in terms of providing radio with financial security, the people with better services and the argument that the press had been irredeemably hostile to the new government. Nonetheless the news was vetted and compiled by the Prime Minister's department and New Zealand had an era of 'public servant' rather than public service broadcasting. Although the National Party railed against this blatant political use of the medium when they came to power in 1949 they continued with their predecessor's structures and used radio for their own publicity - for example, in 1950 the acting Prime Minister read a bulletin on air announcing the conclusion of a national railway strike on terms favourable to the Government.

What this perhaps illustrates is that if politicians are able to use major media for their own advantage they have demonstrated an absolute eagerness to do so despite any democratic concerns.

In our small democracy the line separating the differing roles of the politician and broadcaster could be described as tenuous. We lack a strong tradition of broadcasting's fourth estate responsibility.

We must ensure that the politician cannot wield undue influence on the medium or the medium does not, even unwittingly, grant special rights to any politician.

Douglas Adams, the author of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, offered a pertinent update to our duck analogy: "If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands."

Appearances indicate that we have to consider the strong possibility that these promotions are providing political publicity for one of our political parties and giving it an unfair political advantage. TVNZ, for our democracy's sake, should take them off the air.

* Dr Alan Cocker is head of the School of Communication Studies at AUT University.