TV head’s ban on information

Press, 13 June 1977, Page 15

TV head’s ban on information

I By KEN COATES ' The television page of this ' I newspaper has been denied ; I information about what is [going on in television. It has been denied by the chairman > 'of the Broadcasting Corporation (Mr lan Cross). Mr Cross has decreed that! ’information about any pro-!' [gramme, an actor taking [ part in a programme, or!! even a story that a news-;' reader ha a cold, must noth be given out by either Tele-J’ vision One. South Pacific! Television, or Radio New; [Zealand. 1 [ Mr Cross says journalists | will be talked to only if 1 i newspaper editors sign a let- 1 ; ter saying they will abide by i the rules of copyright 1 iinsisted on by the "New!! [Zealand Listener,” with par-, Iticular reference to a pro-![ iviso forbidding publication!of radio and television pro-i grammes more than 24 i 1 •hours ahead. Under the Broadcasting Act, no information relating! to programmes, including!, times of broadcast, may be;' published except with the!, consent of the corporation,!; and on such terms and con-' ditions as the corporation; may impose. !j The Broadcasting Corpor-ii ation seems to take the view'; that the legal situation be-h , tween itself and "Truth”!

over prior publication of programmes necessitates the present demand to newspapers — all cf which have gone along with the stipulation that programmes listed in the “Listener” may be reproduced not more than 24 hours in advance of broadcasting. j But to order that no-one in [television or radio may give [any information, until news-! [papers agree in writing to! •obey the law, seems to be! [going to ridiculous lengths! ;to restrict information. This newspaper was re-' ! fused information from! South Pacific Television on! the content of next Tues-i day’s “Perspective” programme, for example. The "Listener” is an estimable journal, but it surely cannot claim copyright on ! information that is freely ; available on inquiry to both [journalists and the public. The situation is at present ! dead-locked, and until it is ! settled, information on future programmes and what: [is happening in the tele-! ivision industry will be re-i tstricted. i The corporation’s blackout; [drew criticism from the! head of one of New Zea- [ land’s largest newspaper ■groups, while Mr Cross confirmed that a ban had been ordered on all advance ! programme information to [newspapers ! It would remain in force'

until all papers gave written assurances that they would abide by copyright rules, Mr Cross said. The managing Director of Independent Newspapers, Ltd (Mr J. A.! Burnet) said that he was surprised to see a journalist of Mr Cross’s experience and ability being party to an action that restricted the free flow of information, particularly information from Government-owned corporations. “The people of New Zealand own the corporation and, surely, they are entitled! to this sort of information,”; Mr Burnet said. He could only guess at the reaction of individual news-] .papers to Mr Cross’s ill-con-' sidered proposition that all! advance information about] programmes would be with-' held from all newspapers! until a dispute with one had] been resolved. Mr Justice Ongley in thej Supreme Court at Welling-j ton last week dismissed a motion seeking an interim: injunction to restrain thej I.N.L. weekly “Truth” from' publishing television pro-] grammes a week in advance.