BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

"Morons" was the term used by Metro editor Bill Ralston to describe the Mayor and

Deputy Mayor of Auckland, and other unnamed councillors, who had declined to

contribute Auckland council funds to assist the annual Hero Parade. The comment

was made in a 60 Minutes item which examined the ensuing controversy, broadcast on

TV One between 7.30–8.30pm on 15 February 1998.

Pointing out the definition of a "moron" was someone who was mentally deficient, Mr

Hay complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, about the use of this

offensive term in reference to him.

On the basis that Mr Ralston was expressing a genuinely held opinion, TVNZ

declined to uphold the complaint.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's reply, Mr Hay referred the complaint to the Broadcasting

Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

For the reasons below, the Authority declines to uphold the complaint.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed the item complained about and have read

the correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). On this occasion, the Authority

determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

The Hero Parade in Auckland each February evokes considerable publicity and, in

1998, the Auckland City Council declined to contribute funds to the Parade. The

controversy around the issue was considered in an item broadcast on 60 Minutes. In

relation to the funding issue, the editor of Metro magazine (Bill Ralston) described the

Mayor and Deputy Mayor of Auckland, and other unnamed councillors, as "morons".

David Hay, Deputy Mayor of Auckland, complained to TVNZ that, as the word

meant someone who is mentally deficient, it was offensive to be described in that

way. If he had used such a term in describing supporters of the Parade, he added,

complaints would have been made to such organisations as the Human Rights

Commission.

TVNZ assessed the complaint under standard G13 of the Television Code of

Broadcasting Practice. It requires broadcasters:

G13  To avoid portraying people in a way which represents as inherently

         inferior, or is likely to encourage discrimination against, any section of the

         community on account of race, age, disability, occupational status, sexual

         orientation or the holding of any religious, cultural or political belief. This

         requirement is not intended to prevent the broadcast of material which is:

                        i)    factual, or

                        ii)   the expression of genuinely-held opinion in a news or current affairs

                              programme, or

                        iii)  in the legitimate context of a humorous, satirical or dramatic work.

Arguing that Mr Ralston's comment was clearly the expression of a genuine opinion,

TVNZ said it fell within the exemption contained in standard G13(ii). It declined to

uphold the complaint.

TVNZ expressed the view that should Mr Hay use the term "morons" to describe

members of the gay and lesbian communities, that also would be covered by the same

exemption. The right of free speech in the broadcast medium, it added, was reinforced

by the Bill of Rights Act.

When he referred the complaint to the Authority, Mr Hay said that TVNZ's

argument meant that anybody could say anything on radio and television. Surely, he

wrote, TVNZ had some responsibility for the views expressed in news and current

affairs programmes which it broadcast.

Mr Hay maintained that he should not be attacked as "mentally deficient" for his

belief that the Council's income should not be used to fund the Hero Parade.

In its report to the Authority, TVNZ contended that the word "moron" in the context

it was being used, taking into account the dictionary definitions, was "simply being

dismissive".

Mr Hay, in his final comment in response, said that the word had been used in the

item to portray those who disagreed with Mr Ralston as inherently inferior.

In its determination of the complaint, the Authority considers first the definition of

the word "moron". The Concise Oxford (8th edition) gives two definitions. They are:

            1          colloq a very stupid or foolish person

            2          an adult with a mental age of about 8–12

Taking account of the context and the manner in which the word was broadcast, the

Authority concludes that it was used in the first, and colloquial, sense. Moreover, in

the Authority's opinion, the colloquial use of the word moron is not uncommon in

general parlance in New Zealand.

The Authority, having decided on the manner in which the word was used, then

considers whether it involves a breach of standard G13. It is of the view that,

although it involved the use of a marginally derogatory colloquial expression, it was an

expression of opinion. Thus, it falls within the exemption provided for in standard

G13(ii), and, accordingly, its use did not contravene the standards.

For the reasons above, the Authority declines to uphold the complaint.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
30 April 1998

Appendix

Mr Hay's Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd – 2 March 1998

David Hay, Deputy Mayor of Auckland City, complained to Television New Zealand

Ltd, about an aspect of an item on 60 Minutes, broadcast on 15 February 1998.

The item had dealt with the decision of the Auckland City Council to decline to fund the

Hero Parade. Bill Ralston, editor of Metro, was interviewed and he described the Mayor,

the Deputy Mayor and some others as "morons". Mr Hay said the word meant someone

who is mentally deficient, and he objected to being described in this offensive way.

Mr Hay explained that he had never attacked anyone associated with the Hero Parade, or

with the Gay and Lesbian communities although those communities had complained

about him to the Human Rights Commission. If he had used the word "morons", Mr Hay

commented, there would have been complaints to the Broadcasting Standards Authority

and the Human Rights Commission.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint – 9 March 1998

Assessing the complaint under standard G13 of the Television Code of Broadcasting

Practice, TVNZ advised:

The programme, broadcast a week before the 1998 Hero Parade in Auckland,

examined the controversy surrounding the event and included interviews with a

number of people involved in the dispute over whether the Auckland City Council

should have contributed some funds to assist the parade.

Noting that Mr Ralston's comment was clearly the expression of a genuine opinion,

TVNZ argued that it fell clearly under the exemption provided for in standard G13 (ii).

TVNZ declined to uphold the complaint.

TVNZ commented about the place and impact of personal opinion in news and current

affairs, and wrote:

It is worth pausing for a moment to consider the place personal opinion has in news

and current affairs. We note with interest your view (in the final paragraph of your

letter) that you would not get away with using the term "morons" to describe

members of the gay and lesbian communities. We question that. It seems to us that

the standard quoted above, as well as another which requires broadcasters "to

acknowledge the right of individuals to express their own opinions" (standard G3),

upholds the right of free speech in the broadcast medium. It is a right that is

reinforced by the Bill of Rights Act.

           

We say that you are perfectly entitled during a news or current affairs interview to

describe someone as a "moron" provided that it is clearly your genuinely-held

opinion, and that you are – as Mr Ralston apparently is – prepared to live with the

consequences. Mr Ralston, as editor of a popular magazine, was presumably aware

of the potential impact his attitude to the Mayor and Deputy Mayor might have on

his readers and/or his circulation. Were you to make a similar comment you would

so aware presumably of the political ramifications.

TVNZ also referred to the unsuccessful attempts it had made to get Mr Hay to

participate in the item.

Mr Hay's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 12 March 1998

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Mr Hay referred his complaint to the Broadcasting

Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

Mr Hay explained the reasons for his dissatisfaction:

TVNZ's ruling seems to be that anyone can say anything over radio and television,

providing they maintain it is a genuinely held opinion in the statements made in a

news or current affairs programme.
           

TVNZ also insinuates they have no responsibility as to what anyone says on a

news or current affairs programme, as it is not presented as a view held by TVNZ

or the reporter. Surely, TVNZ makes a decision as to whether to broadcast the

statement or not.

In view of the definition of a "moron" as a person who was mentally deficient, Mr Hay

questioned whether TVNZ agreed with Mr Ralston's description of the people referred

to.

Furthermore, Mr Hay added, 60 Minutes on 15 February conducted a telephone survey,

and 82% of the 15,000 telephone calls supported the Council's stand. Mr Hay

concluded:

As an elected representative of the people of Auckland, I feel I have a right to

represent a large portion of our community without being attacked as being

"mentally deficient" because of my belief that Council Rates income should not be

used to fund the Hero Parade.

TVNZ's Response to the Authority – 24 March 1998

In its report to the Authority on the referral, TVNZ commented that the dictionary

definition of the word "moron" overlooked the context in which it was used. Mr Ralston,

TVNZ maintained, was "simply being dismissive", rather than seriously alleging that the

named councillors were mentally deficient.

Mr Hay's Final Comment – 2 April 1998

In his final comment, Mr Hay expressed his believe that Mr Ralston was aware of the

meaning of "moron" when he used the term, and intended to portray those who

disagreed with him as inherently inferior.