During the KPMG Early Edition, the female host was asked, in reference to her interview with Kim Dotcom at his mansion, ‘What room did you do him in?’ The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the comment breached standards of good taste and decency. It was in the nature of innuendo and was intended to be light-hearted and humorous rather than offensive or degrading to the host.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency
 During the KPMG Early Edition the female host and a male guest discussed the host’s visit to Kim Dotcom’s mansion. Referring to the host’s interview with Mr Dotcom, the guest asked her, ‘What room did you do him in?’ The comment was broadcast at 5.55am on Newstalk ZB on 28 March 2014.
 Roger Woodgate made a formal complaint to The Radio Network Ltd (TRN), alleging that the comment was inappropriate and breached standards. He did not nominate any standards in his complaint. TRN considered the complaint under the good taste and decency standard.
 The issue is whether the broadcast breached the good taste and decency standard as set out in the Radio Code of Broadcasting Practice.
 The members of the Authority have listened to a recording of the broadcast complained about and have read the correspondence listed in the Appendix.
 The good taste and decency standard (Standard 1) is primarily aimed at broadcasts containing sexual material, nudity, coarse language or violence.1 The Authority will also consider the standard in relation to any broadcast that portrays or discusses material in a way that is likely to cause offence or distress.2
 The exchange between the host and the guest was as follows:
Guest: How was Kimbo’s house?
Guest: Was it good?
Host: It was interesting.
Guest: What room did you do him in?
Host: [Laughs] Thanks very much for that [name]. I did it, I think it was the second dining room – there are a few.
 Mr Woodgate argued that the comment made by the guest ‘had a double meaning’ which was offensive and insulting to the host.
 TRN argued that the ‘double entendre’ in the guest’s comment was unintentional, and that it was the host’s response which drew attention to it. The broadcaster said that the comment was one of the ‘inadvertent, lighter moments’ that can occur on live radio, and was ‘relatively tame’.
 In our view, the guest’s comment was in the nature of innuendo and was intended to be humorous, rather than offensive or degrading to the host. The host’s laughter in response indicated she found the double entendre amusing and she was not insulted. Taking into account the time of broadcast at 5.55am and the programme’s adult target audience, we are satisfied that most listeners would not have been unduly offended, and that the comment did not threaten current norms of good taste and decency.
 Accordingly, we decline to uphold the complaint.
For the above reasons the Authority declines to uphold the complaint.
Signed for and on behalf of the Authority
15 July 2014
The correspondence listed below was received and considered by the Authority when it determined this complaint:
1 Roger Woodgate’s formal complaint – 9 April 2014
2 TRN’s response to the complaint – 14 April 2014
3 Mr Woodgate’s referral to the Authority – 7 May 2014
4 TRN’s response to the Authority – 13 May 2014