NPO ombudsman about Ongehoord Nederland: whoever is a journalist is not a conduit

Omroep Ongehoord Nederland violates the journalistic code of the public broadcaster by broadcasting interviews that are insufficiently critical, as a result of which incorrect information can reach the public domain without being contradicted. That concludes NPO ombudsman Margo Smit in a statement about the first three months of broadcasting the new broadcaster on NPO 1.

Until 1 June, Smit received 146 emails about the aspiring broadcaster, which has a provisional recognition of five years. Ten of these emails were complimentary about Ongehoord Nederland (ON).

The opinion of the NPO ombudsman may have consequences for the broadcaster, as the NPO can see it as a guideline when granting administrative sanctions. These can amount to a discount on the budget of 15 percent (on the total of 3.6 million euros per year).

In a response, the NPO speaks of “clear conclusions from the ombudsman about ON’s journalistic actions that really worry us”. The NPO board wants to decide next week whether a measure directed at ON is appropriate and “within our powers”.

Ongehoord Nederland, a broadcaster that serves radical right-wing movements, joined the public system on 1 January this year, after bringing in 50,000 members and receiving three positive (albeit critical) recommendations from the Council for Culture, the NPO and the Commission for Cultural Affairs. the media. From February 22, two days before the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, ON broadcasts a program on Tuesday and Thursday afternoons after the NOS News from 12 noon.

Inquire with guests

The Ombudsman’s criticism focuses mainly on the questioning of guests in Unheard of News, presented by the inexperienced Ahmed Aarad and Arlette Adriani. Podcast presenters Yernaz Ramautarsing and Roelof Bouwman also neglect their journalistic task, she believes. “Whoever is a journalist is not a conduit”, notes Smit. “Then presenters gave little response, questions were mainly statements on which a guest was given a platform, and often only ‘okay’, ‘yes’ or ‘yes’ were said after a guest’s statement, even if there were (possible or demonstrable ) inaccuracies or information of unclear origin were shared.”

In addition, by regularly presenting broadcasting director Arnold Karskens as an interpreter, the broadcaster makes itself vulnerable to uncritical, non-independent questioning because of the evident dependency relationship between employee and boss. Political interpreter Reinette Klever and panel member Peter Vlemmix are also part of the broadcasting board and can be seen regularly on the broadcast.

intolerance

Although ON did not give the ombudsman permission to quote from the response to the judgment, it is clear that Karskens believes that many complaints in fact amount to intolerance for unwelcome opinions. Smith disputes that. “The proportion of unquestioned opinions that come up in all parts of ON programs is striking, and the interview approach where unsubstantiated opinions become fact in the conversation without questioning is almost standard practice.”

In a response to the ON site, Karskens states that he takes the research “seriously”, but repeats that it is “some getting used to that with our entry, other opinions and factual interpretations can be seen and heard in the public system”.

The ombudsman does have a comment: the broadcaster is also not offered the opportunity to show an impartial side, because political parties from a non-radical right corner usually do not respond to ON invitations.

headscarves

There were also complaints about the interrogation by an ON reporter of some women with headscarves in Budel, in a report of nuisance by asylum seekers. The women were asked whether they had paid for their bicycle. Assessing racism and discrimination is outside the domain of the Journalistic Code and therefore the NPO ombudsman, Smit writes. Smit wants to call the fragment “disrespectful and perhaps therefore not appropriate for public broadcasting”.

Also read: ‘Population’ on the NPO, it was coming

A controversial broadcast last month about ‘population’, a loaded concept that forms the basis of the far-right theory that one people replaces another people, has not been assessed by the ombudsman. It is only mentioned as an example of the deficient quality of interviewing. The Flemish radical right-wing politician Filip Dewinter could speak undisputedly of an Islamic invasion and migrant neighborhoods that are expanding like “cancerous tumors”.

NPO-wide, Smit recommends separating facts and opinions more clearly. “Opinions are free (up to the limits of the criminal law) but must always be recognizable as an opinion.”

The first two episodes of Unheard of News, in which the war in Ukraine was explained by, among others, MP Pepijn van Houwelingen (FVD) as a Russian attack provoked by the West, were the immediate cause of the investigation, but they are not explicitly mentioned in the 47-page report. However, Smit has established that ON fails to provide certain sources, ‘possibly propaganda’, with explanation and context, such as information from channels banned in Europe. Russia Today and Sputnik†