National broadcaster PBS discriminated against the Nationalist Party in its broadcasts on three occasions in the space of five days, the broadcasting regulator has concluded.

The Broadcasting Authority was ruling on five complaints filed by the PN in relation to PBS news bulletins broadcast between February 28 and March 4.

It ruled in favour of the complainant in three of those instances but dismissed two other complaints raised by the PN.

The decisions add fuel to persistent complaints by the PN of bias at PBS, which it has taken to mocking as ‘Super One 2’.

In the first of the complaints, the PN argued that PBS was giving airtime to ministers and government representatives to comment on news topics, while not doing likewise with Opposition representatives.

It said that had happened in news bulletins broadcast on February 28, March 1 and 2. 

The regulator agreed, noting that while PBS had “drastically reduced” the number of interviews with government representatives that it aired, it was nevertheless not giving Opposition spokespeople adequate airtime.

In the second complaint, the PN complained that PBS had failed to include a press conference it held at St Luke’s Hospital as one of the key items of its news bulletins on February 28 and March 1.

While the national broadcaster reported on that press conference and subsequent impromptu tour of the hospital grounds, it did not do so with prominence.

The regulator concluded that while PBS enjoys editorial discretion, the news item in question concerned a major national controversy and should have been included in the news bulletin’s main points.

A third complaint filed by the PN concerned the March 3 PBS news bulletin. During that show, the national broadcaster reported on work to regenerate a belevedere in Senglea.

The PN argued that the PBS report was purely an exercise in propaganda and that the broadcaster had only aired the item in response to vociferous criticism of the project on social media.

PBS insisted that there was a public interest element to reporting on the works and that the two people who appeared in the clip were not government spokespeople.

The broadcaster concluded that while PBS was justified in reporting on the works, it was also duty-bound to report that the project faced criticism – something it did not do.

BA dismisses two complaints against PBS

It was not all negative for PBS: the regulator also found in its favour in two other instances flagged by the PN.

In one of those complaints, the PN had argued that PBS had reported on comments made by PN leader Bernard Grech but left out his public appeal for people to attend a national protest the following day.

PBS argued that the call to attend the protest was not news in and of itself, with editor-in-chief Charles Dalli saying the broadcaster “cannot end up being a notice board”.

The regulator concluded that while PBS could not really justify not covering Grech’s call, given its extensive coverage of the issue, by doing so it would have effectively run “political advertising, not news”.

It therefore dismissed the PN’s complaint.

The regulator also dismissed a PN complaint about PBS ignoring a press release it sent on March 4, concerning a government dispute with nurses’ union MUMN.

In that statement, the PN had criticised the government for not finding the money to improve nurses’ conditions, while at the same time paying Steward Health Care millions to run state hospitals.

PBS argued that they saw no news value in the press release, which they believed the party had issued in response to an article published on another news outlet. The broadcaster also noted that the statement also included a call for people to attend a public protest.

The BA concluded that PBS was not legally obliged to report every statement issued by a party and that the broadcaster enjoyed an element of editorial discretion when deciding what to report.

In all of the instances, the PN was represented by lawyer Francis Zammit Dimech and general Secretary Michael Piccinino, while PBS was represented by lawyer Shaun Zammit and editor-in-chief Charles Dalli.