NZ Jewish Council against The Spinoff

Case Number: 3593

Council Meeting: 2 December 2024

Decision: Upheld

Publication: The Spinoff

Principle: Accuracy, Fairness and Balance
Comment and Fact

Ruling Categories: Comment and Fact

Overview

1. On September 5, 2024, The Spinoff published an article titled Made in Palestine, found in 1970s Hastings. It is a brief piece about an upcoming art exhibition, largely a blurb to accompany photos.  The NZ Jewish Council complained under Media Council Principles (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance and (4) Comment and Fact.

The Article

2. The article, described by The Spinoff as a photo essay with a brief intro, is 297 words long. It’s more a promotional piece about an upcoming art exhibition with a clear pro-Palestinian stance, than a news report. At the bottom it states all proceeds from the sale of the photos will be going to Palestine Children’s Relief Fund.

3. It describes how the photos depict a collection of imported vintage cosmetic products found at an estate sale in Hastings. The products have “Made in Palestine” labels and likely predate the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948.

The Complaint

4. The NZ Jewish Council complained about three statements in the article. One about Zionist forces capturing 78% of historic Palestine to establish the State of Israel and referring to the “violent erasure of Palestine”; one about Palestine being rich in resources; and one about the photographs “asserting the historical and ongoing existence of Palestine”.

5. The complainant goes into great detail about the history of the land we today know as Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, claiming the article’s statement of facts about how the State of Israel was formed are grossly and absurdly misleading, simplistic, ahistorical and inaccurate without balance.

6. The complainant says Palestine, wherever that is being referred to in the current day, is not rich in resources as the article states.

7. The complainant says they can’t understand the point of the statement around the photos asserting the “historical and ongoing existence of Palestine”. They say the products were manufactured by Jews and only labelled “Made in Palestine” for convenience. Saying it asserts the ongoing existence of Palestine is simply disinformation, according to the complainant.

8. Additionally, the complainant questions why the article has no byline. They say if it is a news piece, then it is not accurate, fair or balanced and misleads and misinforms readers by both commission and omission. They also note the piece was not marked as opinion or comment, if that is what it was intended as.

The Response

9. The Spinoff says the article is not labelled comment or opinion because it is neither. It’s a photo essay with a brief intro. They say it’s fairly common for short non-feature articles to run without a byline given their brevity and simplicity. The photos are credited, but The Spinoff could not use that as the byline given the short blurb was not written by the photographer. It describes the article as “deliberately brief”.

10. The Spinoff says the events of 1948 are widely understood and reported on as Zionist forces pushing Palestinians from their land. They reference news articles published by Aljazeera, Reuters, the Guardian and the BBC, and content from the United Nations website.

11. In terms of the statement about Palestine being rich in resources, The Spinoff says that’s a direct reference to an earlier passage in the article, where an ad from 1933 includes a reference from the Bible describing Palestine as the “land of milk and honey”. The Spinoff also points to expert analysis around the current conflict in Gaza and Israel’s alleged drive to seize Palestinian resources including gas and oil.

12. The Spinoff says the statement about the photos showing the “historical and ongoing existence of Palestine” reflects the artistic intention of the exhibition. It says asserting the existence of Palestine is a response to some of the attitudes of Israeli officials, some of whom have claimed in speeches that there is no Palestinian history, and no such thing as a Palestinian nation. The Spinoff says the artists are using the vintage products’ named point of origin being Palestine as evidence to the contrary.

13. The Spinoff says in summarising a very complex Palestinian history, a lengthy inclusion of Zionist sentiment is not required for it to be accurate, fair and balanced.

14. In terms of who made the products, The Spinoff says the exhibition is about where they were made, not by who.

15. As a general comment, The Spinoff questions whether the NZ Jewish Council’s complaint is more about the exhibition than the article itself.

The Discussion

16. The article is not a hard news piece. It was published in the Society section of The Spinoff’s website with an unnamed ‘Guest Writer’ byline. It explains how artists Pinky Fang and Emily Hartley-Skudder are using the photos of the cosmetic products to “understand the capitalist dimensions of the conflict”. In its response The Spinoff also says statements in the article reflect the artistic intention of the exhibition. However the article made the controversial statement that “Zionist forces captured 78% of historic Palestine to establish the State of Israel”, and to “…such violent erasure of Palestine”. 

17. Given this statement presented as fact, and other aspects of the article that clearly showed its pro-Palestinian angle, Council members felt the article is an opinion piece, written from the viewpoint of the artists, and should have been labelled as such. Principle (4) Comment and Fact states: “A clear distinction should be drawn between factual information and comment or opinion. An article that is essentially comment or opinion should be clearly presented as such.” This article does not make the distinction.  The complaint under Principle (4) is upheld.

18. In terms of Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance, the complainant argues the purpose of the article appears to be to support a historical narrative that is factually inaccurate and misleading. But the purpose of the article is to promote the upcoming photo exhibition.

19. The complainant itself describes the history of the land dispute in the Middle East as “complex” yet expects The Spinoff to provide adequate balance and fairness to opposing views in a piece fewer than 300 words long. This is simply not feasible in a piece that is really a short statement of opinion, nor required in a brief, simplistic summary. In terms of accuracy, the land dispute is a highly contentious issue with strong views on either side, as evidenced by the current war.

20. In regard to Palestine being called “rich in resources”, The Spinoff points to expert analysis on the current conflict in Gaza about Israel’s alleged drive to seize Palestinian resources including gas and oil. The complainant says commentary about the current conflict is irrelevant as the article relates to pre-1948. But the artists are using the historic cosmetic products to examine today’s conflict. It is relevant in an opinion piece and it shows there are resources considered valuable.

21. The complaint is upheld under Principle (4) Comment and Fact because it purports to present what are statements of opinion as statements of fact, but not upheld under Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance.

Complaints

Lodge a new Complaint.

MAKE A COMPLAINT MAKE A COMPLAINT

Rulings

Search for previous Rulings.

SEARCH FOR RULINGS SEARCH FOR RULINGS
New Zealand Media Council

© 2024 New Zealand Media Council.
Website development by Fueldesign.