Skip to main content

Complaint: RNZ 'New Gaza' Article

This doc provides everything you need to submit a formal complaint to RNZ about their coverage of the US "New Gaza" proposal.

The Article in Question

US touts 'New Gaza' filled with luxury real estate

This article uncritically amplifies US political messaging about redeveloping Gaza as "luxury real estate" without providing adequate context about the displaced population, international law implications, or perspectives from affected communities.

How to Submit Your Complaint​

Step 1: Go to the RNZ Complaint Form​

https://www.rnz.co.nz/formalcomplaints

Step 2: Open the Form​

Click "Show online complaint form" to expand it.

Step 3: Fill in Your Details​

  • Name: Your full name
  • Email: Your email address
  • Postal Address: Your mailing address
  • Phone: (optional)
  • Date of Article: The publication date of the article
  • Article URL: https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/584842/us-touts-new-gaza-filled-with-luxury-real-estate

Step 4: Check These Principles​

Select the following principles that were breached:

  • ✅ Principle 1: Accuracy, Fairness and Balance
  • ✅ Principle 4: Comment and Fact
  • ✅ Principle 6: Headlines and Captions
  • ✅ Principle 7: Discrimination and Diversity

Step 5: Paste the Complaint Text​

In the "Complaint details" text box, paste the following:

Complaint Details

Principle 1 – Accuracy, Fairness and Balance

The article "US touts 'New Gaza' filled with luxury real estate" fails to meet RNZ's obligation to provide fair, balanced, and adequately contextualised reporting on a highly contested international issue.

While the piece accurately reports statements made by U.S. political figures, it presents those statements largely verbatim and without sufficient contemporaneous context or countervailing perspectives, resulting in an unbalanced framing that amplifies official political messaging rather than interrogating it.

Specifically:

- The article reports a proposed vision for a redeveloped Gaza without adequately contextualising:

1. the scale of displacement of Gaza's population,
2. unresolved issues of land ownership and right of return,
3. the legal and humanitarian implications under international law,
4. or the absence of any credible governance, consent, or funding framework.

- No meaningful perspectives are included from:

1. Palestinian representatives or civil society,
2. international humanitarian organisations,
3. legal experts,
4. or independent analysts who have publicly questioned the feasibility or legitimacy of such proposals.

Given the sensitivity and gravity of the situation in Gaza, balance cannot reasonably be achieved "over time" when the article functions as a standalone explainer. The omission of these perspectives materially limits readers' ability to assess the claims being reported.

The result is reporting that is technically accurate in quotation but substantively incomplete, falling short of RNZ's editorial obligation to provide audiences with the information required to understand the issue in full.

Principle 4 – Comment and Fact

Although presented as straight news, the article effectively reproduces political advocacy and speculative visioning without clearly distinguishing between factual reporting and promotional or ideological claims.

Terms such as "luxury real estate" and the framing of a "New Gaza" are inherently value-laden and aspirational. These claims are presented without explicit qualification, scrutiny, or challenge, which risks blurring the line between reporting facts and relaying political commentary.

RNZ did not sufficiently signal to readers that these statements are:
- contested,
- speculative,
- and rejected by multiple stakeholders directly affected by the proposals.

This lack of differentiation undermines the audience's ability to critically evaluate the information presented.

Principle 6 – Headlines and Captions

The headline framing foregrounds the notion of "luxury real estate" without adequately signalling the surrounding humanitarian, political, and legal realities.

While headlines need not contain all nuance, this headline sets a tone that normalises or sanitises a proposal involving an active conflict zone and a displaced population, without alerting readers to the contested and controversial nature of the claims being reported.

This framing risks misleading readers about the substance and seriousness of the issue discussed in the article.

Principle 7 – Discrimination and Diversity

The article's framing marginalises the voices and agency of the population most affected by the proposals described.

By centring powerful external political actors while excluding Palestinian perspectives entirely, the article contributes to a pattern where affected communities are rendered passive subjects rather than active stakeholders. While subtle, this absence has real implications for fair representation and diversity of viewpoints in coverage of global conflicts.


I request that RNZ:

1. Review whether this article met RNZ's editorial standards for balance and contextual accuracy.

2. Clarify how RNZ distinguishes between reporting political claims and scrutinising them in international coverage.

3. Consider publishing additional context or analysis that addresses the significant omissions identified above.

Step 6: Submit​

  • Check "Send me a copy of my responses"
  • Click Submit.
Why This Matters

RNZ is our national public broadcaster. When they publish coverage that uncritically platforms proposals for displacing an entire population as "luxury real estate development" without including affected voices or legal context, they fail their own editorial standards.

Formal complaints are how we hold them accountable.

🇵🇸 Free Palestine.