GREG RZESNIOWIECKI AGAINST MEDIAWORKS NEWSHUB
Case Number: 2845
Council Meeting: NOVEMBER 2019
Verdict: No Grounds to Proceed
Letters to the Editor, Closure, Non-Publication
Misrepresentation, Deception or Subterfuge
CASE NO: 2845
RULING BY THE NEW ZEALAND MEDIA COUNCIL ON THE COMPLAINT OF GREG RZESNIOWIECKI AGAINST NEWSHUB
FINDING: NO GROUNDS TO PROCEED
DATE: NOVEMBER 2019
Greg Rzesniowiecki complains about an article headed 9/11 attacks: the conspiracy theories the internet used to believe. He sought an apology fromNewshub for running the article which he said misrepresented the current knowledge of the 9/11 attack and “its cover up by authorities”. He further complained thatNewshub had ignored his press release which provided a comprehensive and factual account of the reality of the 9/11 attack.
He called on Newshub to undertake a serious investigation of the attack to better inform the New Zealand public as to the truth.
The article canvassed various conspiracy theories that sprung up after the attack, notably the claim that the World Trade Centre buildings in New York did not collapse as a result of fire after the building were hit by hijacked aircraft but were bought down by deliberately placed demolition charges. It also mentioned the claims that the Pentagon was hit by a missile rather than a hijacked aircraft and that one of the hijacked aircraft was shot down, as claimed by those who dispute the "official narrative". The article set out the opposing views and the evidence for and against them and uses terms like “it’s generally believed.”
Mr Rzesniowiecki goes to some length to defend what he describes as genuine critical observations which disprove the “false narrative” advanced by governments and the mainstream media. The Media Council is not a forum for determining all the arguments advanced.
But he advances no compelling reason for challenging Newshub’s justification for running the story or for ignoring his press release on the subject. Decisions on running press releases or any other material is a matter for editorial discretion.
No Grounds to Proceed.