David Farrar: BSA flays Stuff for hatchet job on ASH

The Broadcasting Standards Authority has found Stuff in breach of multiple broadcasting standards for a hatchet job on ASH – Action on Smoking and Health.

Basically what it all goes back to is that ASH is more supportive of reduced harm products (vaping, heated tobacco) on the basis of evidence that these are far less harmful, and do see people substitute them for smoking.

Other anti-smoking groups are basically keen on just prohibition (never mind it never works), and they hate the fact that ASH has a different view. Rather than accept different groups can look at the evidence and come to different conclusions, they are basically suggesting (preposterously) that ASH is in league with or funded by tobacco companies. And they convinced Stuff to do a hatchet job on ASH.

Basically the so called link was that the ASH Director traveled to Australia, and the guy who facilitated his travel works for a group (the Australian Tobacco Harm Reduction Association) which seven years ago got $20,000 from an e-cigarette company. So we’re not talking third or fourth hand connections.

The BSA found Stuff:

• ASH’s position and response to these issues was not, in our view, adequately or fairly presented in the broadcast.

• We also found the programme overall was misleading, and the broadcaster did not make reasonable efforts to ensure it did not mislead.

• In our view, the cumulative effect of the points identified in the complaint was to create an overall misleading impression of ASH, its conduct, including the Australia trip, and its position on vaping generally by omitting an adequate presentation of Youdan’s comments in response.

• We therefore find the item was materially misleading by omission and had potential to cause harm

• This item demonstrated a continuation of the narrative about ASH that was set up by the 26 July broadcast: favouring facts and perspectives that supported that narrative while omitting a fair presentation of ASH’s defence. It had the potential to cause further damage to the integrity and reputation of ASH, its board, and Youdan, and to undermine public trust in ASH as an organisation working in public health.

• The statement chosen for the broadcast did not reflect ASH’s position adequately and had the effect of suggesting ASH was ‘unconcerned’ about youth vaping. It materially misrepresented ASH’s position on youth vaping as outlined in the statement provided to the reporter. Excluding a fair presentation of ASH’s response to the issues and including one sentence that made ASH look ‘worse’, would have significantly altered viewers’ understanding of the story.

• We consider the likely harm caused by the broadcast was significant enough to warrant our intervention and we uphold the complaint under the accuracy standard.

• The overall effect of the broadcast was that viewers were unable to reach an informed opinion and would have been left with an unfairly negative impression of ASH.

This is a very damning decision. It has been either ignored by most media, or placed in a very non-prominent place. The seriousness is shown by the BSA sanctions:

• broadcast a statement that summarises the upheld aspects of the Authority’s decision in relation to the 26 and 30 July 2024 ThreeNews broadcasts

• liaise with Stuff to publish a statement online, on the 26 July 2024 story on stuff.co.nz and embedded video of the 30 July 2024 story on The Press and The Post online

• pay to the complainant costs in the amount of $1,710.62

• pay to the Crown costs in the amount of $3,000 within one month of the date of this decision.

It is very rare to have a finding for costs to the Crown. The BSA notes:

Given our clear view these two ThreeNews broadcasts fell short of the standards the public expects of New Zealand broadcasters, with a serious impact on the reputations of ASH and Youdan, we consider the conduct and seriousness of the breaches justify an award of costs to the Crown in this instance. A punitive response is required to hold the broadcaster to account, deter future non-compliance, confirm our expectations around an appropriate level of editorial oversight, and ensure fairness to programme participants. …

As we have discussed in our findings above, these stories appeared intentionally slanted against ASH and the broadcaster persisted with that narrative despite having information to the contrary, causing serious damage to the reputation of a charitable entity and its director.

Nice to see the hatchet job facing consequences.

David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders.