Photo: RNZ / Nate McKinnon
The Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) has issued judgments which support the accuracy, balance, and fairness of two separate RNZ broadcasts covering complex public-interest issues.
The first complaint, lodged by the Brewers Association of New Zealand, alleged that RNZ broadcasts on New Zealand's low-risk alcohol drinking guidelines - across Morning Report and The Detail - were unbalanced and contained material inaccuracies, specifically regarding a reference to Canada's policies. The BSA dismissed the complaint, providing two significant findings that support RNZ's editorial approach.
The Brewers Association pointed to an inaccuracy concerning the details of the Canadian guidelines. The BSA applied a materiality test, ruling that any alleged inaccuracies in this context were "not material in the context of the overall broadcasts."
The Brewers Association also argued that the broadcasts lacked balance because the alcohol industry's viewpoint was not adequately represented. The BSA rejected this, accepting RNZ's defence of its editorial scope.
The BSA ruled that the Morning Report segment was "clearly signalled as focussing on one aspect" of the complex alcohol policy debate. It said that broadcasters are permitted to focus narrowly on a specific angle without having to recap every opposing viewpoint in every short news item.
For The Detail, the Authority found that the inclusion of comment from the Executive Director of the New Zealand Alcohol Beverages Council and the host's use of 'devil's advocate' questioning were sufficient to alert listeners to alternative perspectives.
The decision confirms that Balance is achieved when the audience understands the existence of competing viewpoints, not through mandatory equal airtime in every segment.
A separate complaint addressed a RNZ news bulletin that reported on the BBC's apology regarding music group Bob Vylan's chanting of 'death, death to the IDF' on air. The complainant, Ong Su-Wuen, argued that RNZ's relaying of the BBC's description of the chants as 'antisemitic' was itself unbalanced, inaccurate, and unfair.
The BSA confirmed that the statement was "clearly attributed to the BBC"; RNZ was reporting the fact of the BBC's administrative action and its use of the word in its official apology - not making an independent editorial judgment on the chant.
The Authority determined that because the statement was attributed, the "audience had the information needed to draw their own inferences and conclusions and would not be misled".
The BSA relies on the audience's ability to assess the source and context of the statement.
The full judgments can be read here: Brewers Association of New Zealand Inc and Radio New Zealand Ltd - 2025-048 (21 October 2025) and Ong and Radio New Zealand Ltd - 2025-051 (21 October 2025)
