Pen Parker against Radio New Zealand

Radio New Zealand (RNZ) published an article on January 9, 2026, titled Gaza civil defence says Israeli attacks kill 7 including 4 children.

This was an AFP news agency story reporting that at least 13 people had been killed in attacks in the Palestinian territory. The information was attributed to the Gaza civil defence agency which operates under Hamas authority.  It also reported comment from the Israeli military including a statement that it had targeted a point from which a projectile had been launched towards Israel.

Pen Parker complained the article breached numerous Media Council Principles.

She said it lacked basic accuracy and balance and presented Gaza Civil Defence as a neutral humanitarian source, when it was an arm of the Hamas administration. It failed to provide context that deaths had resulted from a Hamas rocket that landed near a Gaza hospital.

It also failed to distinguish between unverified claims (comment/propaganda) and established facts. There was no independent, reliable confirmation of the casualties.

She said RNZ’s defence, that balance was provided over time, was not a license for immediate inaccuracy.

RNZ’s assertion that they were shielded from liability because they use “reputable agencies" like AFP, was a dereliction of editorial duty.

“RNZ is responsible for the content it chooses to curate and publish. Reporting the claims of the Hamas-led health ministry as "fact" rather than "unverified claims from a combatant party" misleads the New Zealand public.

She said the headline was biased. It ignored the evidence of a failed Hamas rocket launch (which landed near a hospital) and instead used a definitive "Israel kills" framing.

 She commented further that:

“The cumulative effect of these one-sided reports, which utilize emotive imagery of children alongside unverified claims of Israeli "atrocities," contributes to a hostile environment for the Jewish community in New Zealand. By failing to scrutinize Hamas sources, RNZ is echoing "blood libels" that have real-world consequences for social cohesion.

“I ask the Media Council to find that RNZ has breached the principles of accuracy and balance by failing to provide the necessary scepticism required when reporting claims made by a terrorist organization.”

In response Radio New Zealand said the story made it clear that the Gaza civil defence agency operated under Hamas authority, and it had previously reported that Hamas was a listed terrorist organisation.

The Israeli military was given the opportunity to comment, and the story noted its statement about a projectile fired from within Gaza falling within the Strip. It made no comment about the impact of that rocket, merely that it had attacked the launch point.

The story was about a number of attacks, not just that one incident. These included two drone strikes.

RNZ referred to Media Council notes in its guidance on Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance, that coverage of complex and controversial issues achieves balance over time, and not just in the one news piece.

“RNZ has published a great many articles on the Gaza conflict, including the history of this region. We believe our coverage to be fair and balanced.”

It also referred to a complaint about an earlier story on Israel and Gaza where the Council noted that RNZ and other New Zealand media depend on news agencies to provide their international coverage.

“These are reputable agencies with a lot of experience of covering wars as impartially as they can for a diverse international audience. This includes reporting what happens from day to day, verifying facts where they can and getting the comments of protagonists and observers.”

“The article to which you refer is, in our view, part of this coverage and appropriate for re-publication,” said RNZ.

The Media Council notes the points made in its earlier ruling and adds that it's impractical, if not impossible, for New Zealand media to do their own reporting of wars like this. The agencies they rely on also operate under difficult circumstances where the statements of warring parties often cannot be swiftly verified with confidence.

The story provided appropriate attribution and as with any war, news media have little choice but to report what the protagonists are saying and leave it to readers to decide who they trust and what’s likely to be true.

The Gaza War is a long-running story where balance is expected to be provided over time. The Media Council has seen no evidence that this story or the overall coverage has been inaccurate, unfair or unbalanced or in breach of its other Principles.

That includes the Principle relating to the use of photographs. The photo with this story, showing a displaced Palestinian child outside his refugee camp tent, is shocking. But we have no evidence that it misrepresents life in a war zone.

This was an article from a reputable source, and in the absence of clear error RNZ was able to publish it.

Decision:  No grounds to proceed.