The NZ Media Council has upheld a complaint against RNZ for multiple inaccuracies in a story run in April this year about a mix up of client files at ACC.
File photo. Photo: RNZ / Diego Opatowski
The initial RNZ story headlined ACC file mix up led to use of wrong information for compensation assessment stated that ACC had "mixed up the files of two people and used the medical notes of one to decide how much compensation the other - a sexual abuse survivor - should receive."
ACC complained the story was unbalanced and contained a number of inaccuracies which damaged its reputation. These included the headline, the lead sentence and stating that ACC had declined to be interviewed when RNZ's questions had been put to ACC by email. But the key incorrect allegation, that ACC used one client's notes to determine compensation for another, had stayed online for 10 hours and reached an estimated three quarters of a million people. Despite subsequent corrections ACC said the damage to its reputation had been done.
ACC said it had advised RNZ the medical assessment was completed months before information from one client's file was mistakenly uploaded to another client's file and at no time was the assessor given information that related to a different client.
RNZ acknowledged multiple errors were made and that the story fell below its internal editorial polices. Corrections were quickly made and an apology broadcast the next day. Content sharing partners were also asked to publish the apology and corrections. However RNZ said the gist of the story - that ACC breached another client's privacy by attaching their notes to another client's file - stood despite the inaccuracies.
Had ACC's mistake in wrongly attaching information from one client's files to another been the focus it would have been a more accurate story. Instead, the reporter went further and made the seriously misleading claim that the wrongly attached information had been wrongly used in an assessment process. It had failed to ask ACC for comment, and if it had the error would have been avoided.
The Council supports and respects investigative journalism, especially where it leads to the exposure of systemic failings in business, government or other organisations serving the public, providing it is carried out in a way which is consistent with the Media Council Principles. The Council was mindful of this balance when considering this complaint.
In this case there were multiple inaccuracies, which could have been avoided had the reporter tested the claims of the client with ACC before publication and sighted the documents in question to ensure that balance and fairness were observed. Overall, the combination of a serious inaccuracy and lack of balance and fairness, and the damage done by the article immediately to confidence in the ACC, were not defused by the prompt remedial action by RNZ. In the circumstances this warranted a clear uphold.
The full NZ Media Council ruling can be viewed at mediacouncil.org.nz.
