An unfair go for TV journalism

As news of likely job losses at TVNZ swept through what remains of the media ecosystem on Wednesday, Broadcasting Minister Melissa Lee told Newstalk ZB host Heather du Plessis-Allan that she had “no idea” if jobs were impacted. “You don’t know?” asked a suitably incredulous du Plessis-Allan. Lee’s surprisingly passive manner seemed to embody the Government’s detached approach to an unfolding media crisis. But even TVNZ staff were caught off guard and had to learn the sad news about 68 job losses from rival media companies.

It is confirmed that TVNZ is cutting the flagship current affairs show Sunday, the popular consumer show Fair Go, which has been on air since the 1970s, and midday and late-night news bulletins.

There was worse news across town a week earlier at Newshub, where an entire newsroom is being axed by its owners, Warner Bros Discovery, with the loss of up to 300 jobs. Many of those are jobs are in news and the loss will be felt widely. No amount of online opinion pieces can make up for the absence of actual reporting.

The closure of Fair Go means the end of a popular, feisty, distinctly Kiwi approach to consumer affairs, but the closure of Sunday is more concerning, as it marks the end of a long tradition of current affairs journalism inspired by the likes of Panorama in the UK and 60 Minutes in the US. In the latter case, the US format was even licensed here.

At their peak, the Sunday night shows would compete for huge audiences on rival networks. But it is an expensive format. Some survivors of TV3’s earlier purge made it to the Stuff Circuit team, which has also been disbanded.

A New Yorker article in February asked if the media is prepared for “an extinction-level event”. That apocalyptic phrase has caught on in New Zealand and was a good way of describing impacts on both Newshub and, less devastatingly, TVNZ.

When a Stuff/NZ Herald merger was rejected in 2018, it was said there would be a loss of media plurality. Now a different government seems less concerned about the disappearance of media voices.

While no-one is suggesting the Government should bail out Newshub, or reverse all the proposed TVNZ cuts, Lee’s low profile at a time of genuine crisis seemed bizarre. Yet it is less bizarre than the unleashed behaviour of ACT leader and future deputy prime minister David Seymour.

As well as displaying an egregious lack of feeling for journalists in general, Seymour singled out two TVNZ journalists for individual criticism.

While it is unlikely that either John Campbell or Benedict Collins will lose sleep over being barked at by Seymour, his comments reveal a certain cynicism. Some have argued that Seymour has broken strict rules that prevent shareholding ministers from interfering in TVNZ’s editorial decisions.

While Seymour calls the accusation “farcical”, Otago University law professor Andrew Geddis suggested he may be in breach of the spirit of the TVNZ Act.

Seymour’s commentary seemed ironic when it emerged that he criticised former Labour MP Kiri Allan for doing the same thing in 2023. His words then apply to him now. He said “there is a real problem when the people who hold the purse strings aren’t absolutely critically cautious about even the perception of interfering with media”.

These were not isolated incidents. ACT also called for the sacking of an academic at an extremism research centre set up in response to the March 15, 2019, mosque attacks.

But Seymour knows his audience, and there are plenty of people who think the media reporting on its problems is self-indulgent. Businesses close and jobs are lost in other sectors, with much less coverage. Those inclined to already distrust the media may see the media-on-media attention as excessive.

[Broadcasting Minister] Melissa Lee’s surprisingly passive manner seemed to embody the Government’s detached approach to an unfolding media crisis.

So why should the media be treated differently? One of the most obvious answers is that all governments require a level of scrutiny that can only be provided by a well-resourced and entirely independent fourth estate. All governments should be treated fairly and equivalently, whether it is the current coalition, the previous Labour government or local councils proposing rates increases. But as far as this Government is concerned, you might think of the journalistic spotlight put on NZ First Minister Shane Jones and his loose comments about tobacco industry transparency rules, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith’s resistance to official advice about gang patches, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s accommodation problems and the passing of fast-track legislation. And that’s just in the past week.

You could say that journalism, whether state-funded or commercial, partly exists to put under-prepared ministers on the spot and find out what, if anything, they know.