Rowan Wernham against Radio New Zealand

Radio New Zealand published an article on July 17, 2025, titled Who are the Druze and why is Israel bombing Syria to protect them?

The article, which was tagged as an “explainer” set out why Israel supported the Druze and had come to their defence when they were attacked by other Syrian forces. The syndicated CNN report outlined the complexity of relationships which underlie conflict involving Druze militia, Bedouin militia, Syrian Government forces and the Israeli military.

Rowan Wernham complained the article breached Media Council Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance.

“Posting an article about Israel's bombing of Syria under the headline 'Who are the Druze and why is Israel bombing Syria to protect them?' is a blatant misrepresentation and an extreme bias towards Israel.

Would you write 'who are the Roma and why is Putin invading Ukraine to protect them' - of course not because that would be as deranged as the headline above.

Israel is attacking all its neighbours to destabilize them and reduce military threats to itself as it commits a ruthless genocide against its own Arabic population. These are wars of aggression and should be clearly presented as such.

Protecting the Druze minority is one possible explanation for why Israel is bombing Syria ... but it's not clear this is a singular reason for the action, and it is definitely not a 'fact' worthy of a standalone heading on an article that is presented as an 'Explainer' - a neutral and balanced presentation of information.”

Mr Wernham said both CNN and Reuters had used headlines that did not assert the bombings were carried out to protect the Druze. It was also wrong to republish the Israeli government’s assertion without qualification.

RNZ responded saying this article, identified as Comment & Analysis, was intended to inform readers who may not be familiar with either the Druze community, or the relationship between Syria and Israel. It was comprehensive in explaining the background and included a relevant graphic.  RNZ stated:

“The Media Council’s guidance on Headlines says ‘headlines, sub-headings, and captions should accurately and fairly convey the substance or a key element of the report they are designed to cover’.

The second paragraph states that Israel is citing a commitment to protect the Druze as the reason for its military action.

Whilst you may not agree with the actions of Israel, that does not mean the reportage is biased in its favour.”

The Media Council notes the article appears to be a straightforward report setting out to explain who the Druze people are, why they are supported by Israel and why the Israeli Government said it ordered strikes against Syrian Government forces advancing towards Suwayda. It included comment from the Syrian foreign ministry that this was a blatant violation of sovereignty and reports that the US administration had asked Israel to stop its strikes on Syrian forces in the south of the country.  We do not see it on an overview as presenting a perspective that is either supportive or condemnatory of the bombing, or Israel’s military actions generally. 

This was a lengthy and detailed story covering one element of the conflict that has developed since the 2024 overthrow of the Assad regime. It mentioned how Israel had subsequently seized Syrian territory and repeatedly launched strikes on the country.

The Council saw no evidence that the article was inaccurate, unfair or unbalanced, or that it favoured Israel, as suggested in this complaint. It set out informative facts concerning an event of public interest. The Council also believed the headline accurately and fairly conveyed the substance or a key element of the report. It was not discriminatory against the Druze.

Decision:  No grounds to proceed.