Complaints

Click here for Video On Demand complaint Click here for Video On Demand complaint

Complaints Procedure

A person bringing a complaint against a publication (see member list here) must, unless exempted by the Chair of the NZ Media Council, first lodge the complaint in writing with the publisher of the article.

Complaint to the Publisher

Before the Council may consider a complaint, the complainant must first have complained in writing to the publisher, unless the Council Chair waives this requirement.
The complaint to the publisher must be clearly marked as a complaint and sent to the publisher of the article.
The following time limits apply to complaints to the publisher:
1. A complaint about a particular article: within one calendar month of its first publication.
2. A complaint about a series of articles: within one calendar month of the date:
  1. from which the substance of the complaint would have been reasonably apparent to the complainant, or
  2. the publication of the last article in the series, whichever date occurs first.
3. A complaint about any other matter: within one calendar month of the date on which the publisher received the request to publish.

Complaint to the Council

If the complainant is not satisfied by a publication’s substantive response or receives no response within ten working days from the date on which the publisher received the complaint, the complainant can then lodge a complaint within 20 working days with the NZ Media Council.
A complainant must provide their proper name which will be published unless there are exceptional circumstances as determined by the Chair of the NZ Media Council.
A complainant will be asked to sign a waiver in order for the NZ Media Council to consider the complaint. The purpose of the waiver is to ensure that a complaint to the NZ Media Council is the only form of formal action that will be taken in relation to the article that is the subject of the complaint. The NZ Media Council provides the public access to a free, quick and simple complaints service which is unconstrained by the existence of other proceedings and where publishers can respond openly and admit fault if necessary. The summary nature of the process and the publishers’ co-operation with the process would be compromised if a publisher had to worry about damaging their position in court proceedings about the same issue.

Complaint form

The complaint to the Council must be made using the online form and include:
1. the Principles the complainant believes have been breached
2. the article(s) complained about
3. the initial dated complaint to the publisher and their dated response
4. the key points of the complaint (in 500 words)
5. the complainant's proper name (although in exceptional circumstances, the Council Chair may waive this requirement).
The complainant may provide supporting material. Legal submissions are not required.
When the Council receives a complaint, it may be referred to a Committee or to the full Council. However the decision will not be released unless approved by the NZ Media Council and is a ruling of the Council.

NZ Media Council complaint time limits

The Council will refer a complaint to be considered by the full Council to the publisher for a formal response to the complaint, which must be provided within ten working days. The Council Chair has the discretion to extend this time in appropriate circumstances.
The Council will send the publisher’s formal response to the complainant who has ten working days to provide their final comments. The response should be no more than 200 words and not repeat information already provided. The Council will provide the publisher a copy of any response received from the complainant. If the complainant does not respond, the Council may continue to consider the complaint.
Before ruling on the complaint, the Council may request or receive further information from one or both of the parties and will provide any such information to the other party.
Once the necessary information has been exchanged, the Council will consider and rule on the complaint.
The Council generally rules on complaints based on the information provided by the parties without a hearing. However, the complainant may request approval to speak to the Council. If approval is granted, a representative of the publisher will also be invited to speak. No new material may be provided in the oral submissions without the permission of the Council Chair.
Timeliness of a publication’s response will be taken into account in a decision and may itself be the subject of the Council ruling.

Complainant may ask the Chair to extend time limits

Where a complaint is made to the publisher out of time or is lodged out of time with the Council, the complainant may ask the Council Chair to extend the time for making the complaint.
1. the reasons for the delay,
2. the length of the delay and any unfairness to the complainant if the time is not extended, and
3. any unfairness to another person if the time limit is extended.

Publication of rulings by the Council

The Council publishes its rulings in full on its website and may include them in its annual report, unless the Council, on its own volition or at the request of a party, decides not to publish a ruling.
Published rulings include the names of the complainant and the publisher, unless the Council, in its absolute discretion, decides there are exceptional circumstances and does not publish the name of the complainant.

Publication of adverse rulings against publishers

When a complaint is upheld, the publisher must publish (either online or in print or both) a short summary of the decision provided by the Council. The Council’s summary must be published unedited and unaccompanied by editorial comment. Publishers are not prevented from commenting on the decision elsewhere.
The publisher must ensure the summary is given fair prominence. Where the article was published:
1. in print on pages 1 to 3, the Council may direct that the summary published on page 3
2. in print on a later page, a short pointer is to run on page 3 with the Council summary published on the same, later page as the original story
3. where the article was published on a website, the summary of the decision is to be published in the section in which the original story ran
4. in a magazine, a short pointer on the first available editorial page with the Council summary of the decision on a later page.
All enduring electronic copy that the Council has ruled to be in breach ot its Principles must carry a note at the top of the copy that it has been found in breach and why. Where a potential harm outweighs the need to keep the public record intact, the Council may require the removal of story elements or that the entire story is taken down.
Where an article the Council has ruled inaccurate has been:
1. further published on a publication’s website or social media platforms, the publisher must add a note at the top of the copy to say it has been found to be in breach and why, with a link to the Council’s full ruling, or
2. distributed to other news media, the publisher of the original story must ensure each publication known to have published it adds a note at the top of the item that it has been found to be in breach and why, with a link to the Council’s full ruling.
If a complaint is not upheld the publisher may determine whether to publish the full Council ruling and where it should be published.
The NZ Media Council may direct a right of reply, correction or retraction. In egregious circumstances, with a unanimous decision, the NZ Media Council may censure a publication. Such a censure must be published in the publication or website giving due prominence.

Conflicts of interest

A minority of the eleven members of the NZ Media Council are employed by media publishers as part of the prescribed makeup of the NZ Media Council. The majority of members are public members. See the NZ Media Council’s Conflicts Policy page.

Other requirements

The NZ Media Council may consider a third party complaint from a person who is not personally aggrieved. However, it reserves the right to require the complainant to first seek written consent from the individual who is the subject of the article complained of.
Publications, websites and blogs must not give undue publicity to a complaint until it has been resolved or adjudicated. However, the fact a complaint has been made can be reported.
Editors are to publish information about the Council's complaints process in each issue of the publication. This should be by way of a brief statement at either the foot of a news briefs or on the editorial or letters page, on the contacts page for websites or on the imprint page for magazines.

Lodge a complaint

Back to Complaints Procedure? Back to Complaints Procedure?

VOD Complaints Procedure

Please read the following Complaints Procedure before lodging a complaint.

NZ Media Council - VOD Classifications Code – Application & Complaints Process

Scope
1. Complaints under the NZ Media Council’s Video-On-Demand (“VOD”) Classifications Code (“Code”) may be made only against online content that is required to be classified according to the Code (“VOD programmes”).
2. Online programmes classified prior to the service provider becoming a signatory to the Code are not required to be reclassified according to the Code.
Complaints & Time Limits
1. Complaints under the Code may be brought at any time whilst the VOD programme remains available on the service provider’s website.
2. Complaints shall first be directed to the relevant service provider for consideration in accordance with its internal complaint procedure. Providers shall provide user-friendly guidance on their websites on how to access their complaint procedure, such guidance to explain the circumstances in which a complaint may proceed to the Media Council.
3. A service provider must provide a response to any genuine complaint as soon as is practicable.
4. If the complainant is not satisfied with the service provider’s response, the complainant may refer the complaint to the Media Council within ten working days of the date of receipt of the service provider’s response. The complaint should include the service provider’s response. Complaints should be lodged via the Media Council’s website or in writing to the Media Council .
5. The Media Council may not consider a complaint if the complainant is currently taking or is likely to take proceedings against the service provider in another jurisdiction. The Media Council may at its discretion request a written undertaking not to take or continue proceedings against the provider before proceeding with the complaint.
Referred Complaints
1. The Chair of the Media Council shall determine whether the complaint meets the criteria for acceptance by the Media Council. The complainant will be advised whether the complaint is to be heard by the Media Council. If the complaint is not accepted, the complainant will be advised of the reasons for this decision. The Chair's decision will be final.
2. If the Chair considers there is a potential breach of a VOD classification to be investigated by the Media Council, the Chair will refer the complaint to the service provider and its seek comment within ten working days or sooner if the Chair considers that the material in question gives rise to a real risk of significant harm to an individual or group of individuals.
3. The Chair may choose to assist the parties to mediate complaints. Complaints may also be withdrawn and/or settled between the parties at any time.
4. A service provider may withdraw or reclassify the VOD programme in question at any time, and shall refer to this in its response to the Media Council.
Adjudication of complaints made under the Code
1. Complaints accepted for consideration will be put before the VOD Classifications Committee of the Media Council (“Classifications Committee”). The Classifications Committee shall consist of five persons appointed by the Governance Committee of the Media Council (or their alternates).
2. The members of the Classifications Committee shall comprise:
  1. The independent Chair of the Media Council
  2. Two public members nominated by the Chair of the Media Council
  3. Two industry members nominated by service providers
3. The Classifications Committee will determine its own procedures for the most efficient way of adjudicating complaints, with the objective of determining whether the service provider’s classification is a reasonable classification decision, which is broadly consistent with previous classification decisions and audience expectations of the classification.
4. The quorum for any meeting of the Classifications Committee shall be three members with a majority of public members.
5. If a complaint under the Code is upheld in whole or in part, the service provider must reclassify the VOD programme as stipulated by the Classifications Committee.
Remedies
1. The powers of the Council are set out in the NZ Media Council's rules [live link here]. In summary:
  1. Members must comply with any direction from the Council to reclassify any VOD programme.
  2. Where content is reclassified, members must take all reasonable steps to have the content reclassified on any third party sites that they control where they are aware the content has been published.
  3. If the Council upholds a complaint, the Council shall publish the decision on its website.
  4. In egregious circumstances, with a unanimous decision, the Council may censure a member to the extent permitted under the Council’s rules and procedures.
2. Where the Council directs a VOD programme to be reclassified, any other memberpublishing the same content must also comply with the decision when they receive notification from the Council or otherwise become aware of it.