Make a Complaint Make a Complaint

Joshua Riley against Radio New Zealand

Case Number: 3885

Council Meeting: 20 July 2026

Decision: Not Upheld

Publication: Radio NZ

Principle: Accuracy, Fairness and Balance

Ruling Categories: Accuracy
Balance, Lack Of
Unfair Coverage

Overview

1. On May 14, 2026, Radio New Zealand (RNZ) published an article headlined India's negotiators threatened to walk out of trade talks with New Zealand, official reveals. The article reported on the chief trade negotiator's appearance before a parliamentary select committee regarding the New Zealand–India Free Trade Agreement (FTA).

2. Joshua Riley complained that the article, alongside a historical pattern of coverage by RNZ, breached Media Council Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance. The complaint is not upheld.

The Article

3. The subject of the complaint is a news report covering the appearance of New Zealand’s chief trade official, Vangelis Vitalis, before the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee.

4. The article leads on Mr Vitalis telling the committee that Indian negotiators threatened to walk out of talks over New Zealand’s efforts to include dairy. Mr Vitalis told the committee India’s refusal to engage on the topic helps explain the “big disappointment” of the deal - the limited gains for dairy.

5. The article also covers Mr Vitalis’ responses to questions from MPs regarding migration and investment provisions within the FTA. It reports Mr Vitalis stating that the deal contains "important safeguards" around a pathway for up to 5,000 Indian professionals under Temporary Employment Entry (TEE) visas.

6. The article includes comment from New Zealand First leader Winston Peters. Mr Peters criticises the failure of the select committee to ask searching questions of Mr Vitalis; highlights discrepancies in how a US$20 billion investment target was being described by Indian versus New Zealand ministers; and says Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s rush to secure a deal this term resulted in the failure to get a better deal on dairy.

The Complaint

7. Mr Riley complains under Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance, arguing that the article creates a misleading impression of the FTA's migration provisions.

8. The complainant seeks a time extension or "series treatment" under the Media Council's procedures to introduce 11 historical RNZ articles published between December 2025 and April 2026. He argues these past articles establish a consistent, systemic "editorial pattern" where RNZ has used its own narrative voice to favour the Government's framing of the FTA.

9. Mr Riley argues that the May 14 article, published after the text of the agreement was released on April 28, continues the uncritical repetition of the Government's framing of immigration provisions in the deal.

10. The May 14 article frames Mr Vitalis’s testimony on a narrow aspect of the FTA’s immigration provisions as a response to Mr Peters’ broader immigration critique, Mr Riley says.  He points to specific clauses in the trade deal regarding New Zealand’s ability to cap the number of visas given to Indians.

11. Where the FTA text and the public statements of New Zealand ministers have been in conflict, RNZ has consistently rendered the matter, in its own narrative voice, in terms favourable to the Government, Mr Riley says.

The Response

12. RNZ says the article of 14 May is a straightforward news report of a parliamentary Standing Committee that meets the Council's Principle regarding accuracy, fairness and balance.

13. RNZ says the article is an accurate and detailed account of Mr Vitalis’s comments and the questions he was asked in the select committee.  The article did not need to go into details of the FTA that were not raised there.

14. RNZ further notes that balance can be judged on a number of stories, rather than a single report.

15. RNZ says while historical articles may be relevant insofar as they relate to the May 14 report, they fall outside the scope for separate consideration under the Media Council's rules.

16. RNZ rejects the complainant's characterisation of its editorial intent. RNZ says it has not made any deliberate editorial decision to adopt a particular narrative stance on the FTA. Rather, its coverage of the FTA is composed of discrete news reports produced in RNZ's normal daily news style, responding to developments as they occur. It is not a specifically commissioned series.

17. RNZ says it has consistently provided relevant parties with opportunities to comment across its platform, including through its regular flagship news programmes Morning Report and Checkpoint.

18. RNZ says it notes Mr Riley’s broader concerns regarding coverage of the NZ-India FTA and has taken them into account.

The Discussion

19. Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance states:

Publications should be bound at all times by accuracy, fairness and balance and should not deliberately mislead or misinform readers by commission or omission. In articles of controversy or disagreement, a fair voice must be given to the opposition view.  Exceptions may apply for long-running issues where every side of an issue or argument cannot reasonably be repeated on every occasion and in reportage of proceedings where balance is to be judged on a number of stories, rather than a single report.

20. In considering this complaint, the Media Council notes that 11 of the 12 articles submitted by the complainant were published outside the time window for complaints. While the Council has reviewed the material, this determination is focused on the article headlined India's negotiators threatened to walk out of trade talks with New Zealand, official reveals on May 14, 2026.

21. The May 14 article is a conventional report of a select committee appearance. It reports the evidence given by a senior official on a matter of public interest and contains balancing critical commentary from New Zealand First leader Winston Peters.

22. The complainant argues that the article is unbalanced because it fails to cover specific legal clauses within the trade deal around the ability of New Zealand to cap the number of visas issued to Indians.

23. Visa numbers may well be a contentious point in the trade agreement, but it is not a point that either Mr Vitalis or Mr Peters engages with in detail within this article. The critical commentary provided by Mr Peters is focused on other aspects of the deal, not visa numbers.

24. Under Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance, balance can be obtained over time in the reporting of a long running issue. RNZ says balance over time applies in this case but did not provide examples of previous coverage. The complainant contends that previous reporting by RNZ show a pattern of bias and provided a selection of RNZ articles to support his complaint.

25. Regardless, the Media Council finds that balance over time is not a consideration.  The article in question is a fair report of the chief trade official’s appearance at the select committee and contains balancing comment from the leader of New Zealand First, which opposes the deal.  This is a single news report of a trade official appearing before a select committee – it cannot by its nature cover every aspect of a 1300-page international trade treaty. RNZ’s coverage of the NZ-India FTA does not begin or end with the article being considered in this decision. Should the specific legal concerns raised by the complainant around migration gain further political momentum, future coverage will follow.

Decision: The complaint is not upheld under Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance.

Council members considering the complaint were Hon Raynor Asher (Chair), Hank Schouten, Bernadette Courtney, Tim Watkin, Guy MacGibbon, Scott Inglis, Ben France-Hudson, Alison Thom, Jo Cribb, Susan Freeman-Greene, Andrew Chen, Deborah Morris, Judi Jones, Marie Shroff.

Tim Watkin declared a conflict of interest and did not vote.