The Broadcasting Standards Authority has ruled the Mike Hosking breached standards when he incorrectly stated on Seven Sharp” you can’t vote for the Māori Party because you’re not enrolled in the Māori electorate” during the election campaign, and the following night he churlishly dismissed criticism.
On 23 August 2017 he stated:
…so is the fact that you can’t vote for the Māori Party because you’re not enrolled in the Māori electorate, so what are you going to do now? I’m joking.
That wasn’t a fact, it was false, and he was widely criticised for saying it. The following evening he said:
Now, small clarification for you. Now last night in a throwaway line I appear to have confused the Māori Party around the rules of voting and MMP. Now what I was suggesting, what I was meaning, was that the Māori Party, as their representation stands, is an electorate party. In other words they are only in Parliament because they won an electorate seat. Therefore what I said in referring to voting for them, was to vote for them in a Māori electorate you had to be on the Māori roll, which is true.
Now, the fact that anyone can vote for them as a list party I automatically assumed we all knew given we have been doing this for 20 years for goodness’ sake and it went without saying. So hopefully that clears all of that up.
That was a pathetic response. He blamed the Māori Party for being confused, he gave a lame explanation, and then effectively blamed anyone who didn’t know the fact that anyone could vote for the Māori Party.
If you are not on the Māori roll you can’t vote for a Māori electorate candidate, but you can’t vote for any candidate in any electorate except for the electorate you are enrolled in.
Hosking’s comment was sloppy at best – it appeared to be ignorant. And his response the following night was pathetic and irresponsible.
It was poor of TVNZ to allow this to happen as well – they accept the BSA decision and will broadcast an apology this week.
BSA Summary
During an item on Seven Sharp, broadcast on 23 August 2017 during the election period, the presenters discussed TVNZ’s ‘Vote Compass’, a tool available to assist the New Zealand public to make voting decisions. In response to comments by presenter Toni Street about the usefulness of the tool, presenter Mike Hosking said, ‘…so is the fact that you can’t vote for the Māori Party because you’re not enrolled in the Māori electorate, so what are you going to do now? I’m joking.’
The following evening, Mr Hoskingattempted to clarify his comment by saying, ‘Now, the fact that anyone can vote for [the Māori Party] as a list party I automatically assumed we all knew given we have been doing this for 20 years…’
The Authority upheld a complaint that Mr Hosking’s comments were inaccurate, finding that Mr Hosking’s statement about who was eligible to vote for the Māori Party was a material point of fact that was inaccurate and misleading.
Further, his comments the following evening were confusing and insufficient to correct the inaccurate information for viewers.
The Authority acknowledged the high value of political expression during an election period, but found that the potential harm in this case – providing inaccurate information which had the potential to influence voters, despite the alleged clarification – outweighed the broadcaster’s right to freedom of expression.
Upheld: Accuracy; Order: section 13(1)(a) broadcast statement.
Did the statement amount to a material point of fact?
…we have reached the view that Mr Hosking’s comment was presented as fact. We recognise that, as a presenter, Mr Hosking’s style and tendency to offer his opinions on a broad range of topics is well-known to viewers.
However, in this case, Mr Hosking’s comment in effect asserted that only those enrolled in a Māori electorate were able to vote for the Māori Party. This was a statement of fact capable of verification.
We also consider it was material in the context of the discussion about Vote Compass and the upcoming election, as it had the potential to influence viewers’ voting decisions.
We do not consider that TVNZ’s and Mr Hosking’s argument that this was a passing, ‘throwaway line’ or joke changed the nature of the statement as a factual assertion. Mr Hosking’s language (‘the fact that’) implied that this was an authoritative statement and we do not consider it was clear from the 23 August broadcast what Mr Hosking’s statement ‘I’m joking’, referred to.
We do not consider this, or Ms Street’s reaction, were sufficient to correct the inaccuracy or to reflect to viewers that Mr Hosking’s comment was not factual or meant to be taken seriously. This was particularly so in the context of an item that was seeking to promote the utility for voters of TVNZ’s Vote Compass election tool.
Was the statement inaccurate or misleading?
We therefore find that Mr Hosking’s comment was factually inaccurate and was likely to mislead viewers about whether they could vote for the Māori Party.
Did Mr Hosking’s comments the following evening correct the inaccuracy?
We consider that the clarification or explanation provided was flippant and too general to cure the inaccurate statement made the previous evening. Given the high public importance and the potential to influence voters, in circumstances where TVNZ accepted the comments were inaccurate, Mr Hoskingshould have made a clear, formal statement correcting his earlier inaccurate remark.
In order to clarify his previous comments, in our view, it was necessary for Mr Hosking to provide a clear explanation of the Māori roll, Māori seats and the rights of all voters to vote for the Māori Party when casting their party vote.
We consider Mr Hosking’s clarification was dismissive, in that he did not accept his statement was incorrect, instead suggesting it was the Māori Party who got ‘confused’, and voters should have known better than to be misled.
Conclusion
In light of the importance of free, frank and robust political speech during the election period, we are cautious to interfere unless a relatively high threshold is reached which justifies placing a limit on that speech. After careful consideration, however, we have found that the potential harm caused by this broadcast, in leaving viewers misinformed about their ability to vote for the Māori Party, outweighed the broadcaster’s right to freedom of expression.
We consider that Mr Hosking’s statement during the 23 August 2017 broadcast was inaccurate and misleading, and that the clarification subsequently provided was confusing and insufficient to correct the inaccuracy.
This was an important issue, particularly during the election period, and had the potential to significantly affect voters’ understanding of the Māori roll and of New Zealand’s electoral system.
TVNZ has accepted the decision “and found no errors or misunderstandings by the Authority”.
Order
Under section 13(1)(a) of the Act, the Authority orders Television New Zealand Ltd to broadcast a statement. The statement shall:
- be broadcast at 7pm at the conclusion of 1 News
- be broadcast on a date to be approved by the Authority, no later than Thursday 21 December 2017
- contain a comprehensive summary of the upheld aspects of the Authority’s decision
- be approved by the Authority prior to being broadcast.
RNZ: Hosking’s Māori party comments ‘inaccurate, misleading’
In a statement, TVNZ said it accepts the decision and will broadcast a statement this week.
“There was no intention to mislead viewers and Mike’s comments were presented as a throwaway line made in the context of a light-hearted exchange between the hosts.”
That’s an odd response given the BSA decision ruled against ‘throwaway line’:
We do not consider that TVNZ’s and Mr Hosking’s argument that this was a passing, ‘throwaway line’ or joke changed the nature of the statement as a factual assertion. Mr Hosking’s language (‘the fact that’) implied that this was an authoritative statement and we do not consider it was clear from the 23 August broadcast what Mr Hosking’s statement ‘I’m joking’, referred to. We do not consider this, or Ms Street’s reaction, were sufficient to correct the inaccuracy or to reflect to viewers that Mr Hosking’s comment was not factual or meant to be taken seriously. This was particularly so in the context of an item that was seeking to promote the utility for voters of TVNZ’s Vote Compass election tool.
And Hosking’s follow up comments were not throwaway, they were dismissive of his ignorance, instead blaming others.
Seven Sharp has finished for the year, and Hosking has quit the show, so may avoid fronting up and taking responsibility himself.
BSA decision: McCaughan and Television New Zealand Ltd – 2017-083