Shannon Torstonson against TVNZ

Television New Zealand published an article on its 1News website on March 2, 2026, titled Healing the sick or preying on the vulnerable?  US faith healer performs in NZ.

The story was about the planned appearance in Auckland of Kathryn Krick, a Los Angeles-based faith healer and church leader who has millions of followers on TikTok and YouTube. Krick is described by followers as the “Apostle”, a vessel for God capable of casting out demons and healing everything from depression to terminal cancer.

The article included comment from a local follower who says she was cured of an obsessive-compulsive order and hoped for a cure for her son whose medical treatments for seizures have not been successful.

It also reported comment by former Medical Association chairwoman Pippa MacKay that Krick’s claims cross a dangerous line, and that stopping medications could be dangerous.

Dr Mackay acknowledged that faith healing could provide a placebo effect, potentially improving a person's sense of well-being regarding mental health or addiction but “With things like HIV or late-stage breast cancer or autism, [that] is bulls**t, in my opinion... that's just not a thing.”

The article also reported that:

“Under New Zealand law, you cannot claim to be a health practitioner without a practising certificate, nor can you supply medicines and certain products, or provide certain health services without a licence. But Krick operates in a legal grey area. She can make almost any claim despite contradicting medical science.”

Shannon Torstonson complained that 1News breached Media Council Principle (4) Comment and Fact which states a clear distinction should be drawn between factual information and comment or opinion.

“Implying that faith healing, a mainstream belief in Christianity, contradicts medical science conflates opinion with fact.”

She doubted it was an undisputed fact among medical professionals that miraculous healings contradict medical science.

“As a Christian, I felt both hurt and, unfortunately, angered by this, because it seemed like One News was unjustly discrediting Christianity.”

TVNZ said its complaints committee considered her complaint under Principals (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance, and Principle (4).

“It is true that Kathryn Krick is not affected by restrictions placed upon certified health practitioners in New Zealand as she is not one. As such, the Committee considers it is fair and accurate to describe her as operating in a legal grey area and able to make claims contradictory to contemporary medical science.

“Readers and viewers would understand that the ‘grey area’ relates to advice that could be construed as medical advice, or a replacement for medical advice, even if it is not strictly categorised or framed as such by Krick.

“The article did not dismiss faith healing overall as contradictory to medical science, as you claim, nor are any other faith healers scrutinised in this article. The medical expert quoted in the article said faith healing can have a positive effect (which, in their view, is achieved through a placebo effect) but rebutted claims certain conditions could be cured, considering Krick to have crossed a dangerous line.

“The article and video are focused specifically on Kathryn Krick and her work. Importantly, she is afforded the opportunity to comment about the concerns raised by the reporter about a specific past case, as well as her method and business model in general, and upcoming NZ event.

“In the interests of balance and public safety it is entirely appropriate and responsible for 1News to include the opinion of a medical expert in this manner, and the Committee disagrees their advice is inconsistent with the views of broader medical community.

“Accordingly, the Committee finds no reasonable grounds to consider the article is contrary to the principles of Accuracy, Balance, or Fairness.

As for the complaint under Principle (4) the perspectives of medical expert Pippa MacKay, Kathryn Krick, and the Kiwi mother of a sick child were clearly framed and would be seen as opinion through the article, satisfying the expectations of this Principle.

The Media Council found that the remark “Krick operates in a legal grey area. She can make almost any claim despite contradicting medical science.” was not shown to be inaccurate.

The story supports the comment made – faith healers are not restricted as to what they can claim as health practitioners are. This means they can claim to cure people in ways that are inexplicable to medical science.

As important as their faith is to believers, questioning the validity of what faith healers claim is not an attack on Christianity. There is no reason to exclude the activities of faith healers from journalistic inquiry.

Scepticism is justified. Some people of all types – religious, medical, or financial – thrive by preying on naive, desperate, and vulnerable people. Discussing them is in the public interest and not an affront to religion, medicine, or the financial system.

Decision:  No grounds to proceed.