BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

According to host John Banks, in his programme broadcast on Radio Pacific on 31 July 1998 between 6.00-9.00am, New Zealand needed allies like the Americans to protect it from enemies like Japan. Other similar references were made to Japan and its people.

Mrs Knight complained to Radio Pacific Ltd, the broadcaster, that the remarks should not have been broadcast. In her view, the only purpose of the comments was to engender negative feelings among New Zealanders about Japan. She considered they were personal views, which Mr Banks should have kept to himself. Mrs Knight asked for an explanation and apology.

In its response, Radio Pacific emphasised that talkback was a forum in which a variety of views could be expressed, even those which were contentious and provocative. It suggested that those who objected to Mr Banks’ views should phone and have their say on air. Radio Pacific expressed its regret for any offence caused, but stressed the importance of the right to freedom of speech, and to the host’s right to express his genuinely-held views.

Dissatisfied with Radio Pacific’s response, Mrs Knight referred the complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

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

Decision

The Members of the Authority have listened to a tape of 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.

In the context of a discussion about New Zealand’s stance on visits by nuclear powered warships, Radio Pacific’s host John Banks suggested that it did not make sense to turn away American warships but to permit Japanese warships to visit. He recalled the situation in World War II when the United States had been New Zealand’s ally and Japan had been the enemy. He referred to Japan as the enemy on several occasions during his programme broadcast on Radio Pacific on 31 July 1998 between 6.00–9.00am.

Mrs Knight of Christchurch complained to Radio Pacific that the host’s remarks were ignorant and irresponsible. She said she believed his intention was to express his dislike of and bitterness towards Japanese people, and to provoke negative feelings for the Japanese among New Zealand people.

Mrs Knight said that she believed in freedom of speech, but considered there were limits to that freedom. In her view, the host should have kept his feelings to himself as his comments were not constructive and should not have been broadcast. She demanded an explanation and an apology.

When Radio Pacific responded to the complaint, it emphasised that the host’s views were his personal opinions, and that talkback was an appropriate forum to express all manner of views, even those which could be considered provocative or contentious. It noted that the remarks related to the position during World War II when New Zealand was at war with Japan and it was only the intervention of America that saved New Zealand from Japanese occupation. It noted that there were still people in New Zealand who had suffered at the hands of the Japanese in prisoner of war camps. Nevertheless, it invited Mrs Knight to phone in and express a contrary view, arguing that talkback was only truly effective when people with opposing views phoned to express them.

When Mrs Knight referred the complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority for investigation and review, she asked the Authority to assess the complaint under standards R1 and R5 and "any other" applicable standard of the Radio Code of Broadcasting Practice. Those standards require broadcasters:

R1 To be truthful and accurate on points of fact in news and current affairs programmes.

R5 To deal justly and fairly with any person taking part or referred to in any programme.

Mrs Knight dismissed Radio Pacific’s argument that the host was referring to World War II when he said Japan was the enemy. She said it was clear he was speaking in current terms and added that she found his comments offensive.

Mrs Knight advised that she did not intend to argue with the host on air, but simply wished to discover how far freedom of speech could go without breaching programme standards.

In its report to the Authority, Radio Pacific argued that standard R1 did not apply, as a talkback programme was neither news nor current affairs. It noted that its hosts and callers expressed opinions on a wide range of subjects, and that at times their views were provocative and controversial. It emphasised that the host was expressing his own opinions, and argued that opinions did not need to be truthful or accurate.

Turning to standard R5, Radio Pacific submitted that as no person was named or referred to, the standard did not apply.

In concluding, Radio Pacific stressed that talkback was a robust medium. Because listeners could respond immediately if they found something they did not agree with, Radio Pacific said it believed every participant should have the right to speak out freely unless there was a blatant breach of the standards. It advised that it remained of the view that the complaint should not be upheld.

The station provided the Authority with tapes of the full three hour programme.

The Authority for the most part accepts Radio Pacific’s contention that the ethos of free speech is central to talkback radio. It concurs with Radio Pacific’s interpretation of standards R1 and R5 and agrees that they are not applicable to this complaint. Standard R1 does not apply because the programme is not a news and current affairs programme, and standard R5 does not apply because the remarks were not directed towards a particular person.

In light of Mrs Knight’s request to assess the complaint under "any other" standard, the Authority considers standard R14 is also apposite as she had expressed a concern that the remarks would provoke negative feeling among New Zealand people. Standard R14 requires broadcasters:

R14 To avoid portraying people in a manner that encourages denigration of or discrimination against any section of the community on account of gender, race, age, disability, occupational status, sexual orientation or as the consequence of legitimate expression of religious, cultural or political beliefs. This requirement is not intended to prevent the broadcast of material which is

factual, or

the expression of serious opinion, or

in the legitimate use of humour or satire.

First the Authority notes that the Japanese people are a section of the community to whom the standard applies. Next it is required to decide whether the remarks would have encouraged denigration of or discrimination against them. The Authority notes that while the comments revealed the host’s prejudices, in view of the lack of response from listeners to the host’s continued calls for comment, they did not receive a great deal of support. This could be an indication that listeners did not appear to agree that the nuclear ships issue was related to the conduct of the Japanese during World War II. For the most part, the Authority does not believe the host’s reference to the Japanese as "the enemy" encouraged denigration of or discrimination against them. However, it finds that when he described them as "the meanest spirited people in the world" the limits of standard R14 were tested. Nevertheless even if such a comment was found to be a breach of the standard, the Authority notes that exemption (ii) applies, as the host was expressing his own opinion. It therefore finds no breach of this standard.

With respect to Radio Pacific’s suggestion that Mrs Knight’s remedy was to debate the issues on air with the host, the Authority doubts that this is a realistic option for many listeners, particularly for a minority group for whom English is not their first language. The forum is hardly neutral, the Authority observes, and it believes it would be extremely intimidating for a private citizen to be pitted against the experienced paid host who, in the programme which the Authority listened to, cut off callers he did not agree with. The Authority concludes that such an offer is not an adequate remedy for infringement of the standard R14 principles.

Finally the Authority makes the observation that this is the second occasion on which it has not been assisted by this broadcaster’s approach in supplying three hours of unedited tapes when the comments were confined to a relatively brief period during the programme.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
1 October 1998

Appendix

Mrs Knight’s Complaint to Radio Pacific Ltd – 31 July 1998

Mrs Taeko Knight of Christchurch complained to Radio Pacific Ltd about remarks made by host John Banks during his show on 31 July 1998 between 6.00–9.00am.

The host made the observation that war ships from Japan could visit New Zealand ports, but that it was difficult for American ships to visit. In his view, America was an ally, and it was only as a result of its intervention that New Zealand was saved from Japanese occupation during World War II. He said that New Zealand needed allies like America to protect it from enemies like Japan.

According to Mrs Knight, those views were repeated several times in his discussion. He also predicted that he would be the only talkback host who was prepared to state those views.

Mrs Knight wrote that she sincerely hoped he was the only talkback host who was so ignorant as to make such an irresponsible comment. She continued:

What was the real purpose of his comments? I cannot think of any other reason than him expressing his dislike and bitterness towards the Japanese and to provoke negative feelings among NZ people.

Mrs Knight emphasised that she believed in freedom of speech, particularly on talkback shows, but that she considered there should be some limits. In her view, the host should have kept his feelings to himself, as the comments were not constructive and should never have been on air, or repeated in the future.

She said that she expected appropriate action from the host, and demanded that he explained and apologised.

Mrs Knight enclosed a list of others who shared her views about the broadcast.

Radio Pacific’s Response to the Formal Complaint – 4 August 1998

Radio Pacific responded that it understood Mrs Knight’s concerns regarding the references to Japan as the "enemy". However, it did not agree that the host should have kept his feelings to himself. It noted that talkback was a forum where all manner of views could be expressed, including those which were contentious and provocative.

Noting that the thrust of the argument was that Japanese ships could visit our ports, but that it was more difficult for American ships, Radio Pacific wrote:

[The host] feels strongly that America is an ally and that within living memory New Zealanders can recall a time we were at war with Japan and it was only the intervention of America that probably saved New Zealand from Japanese occupation. There are also still New Zealanders alive who suffered at the hands of the Japanese in prisoner of war camps. Time will erase those memories in due course, but they are there and if John Banks or any other person wishes to raise them during one of our programmes, I believe that is an appropriate use of talkback.

In Radio Pacific’s view, the most appropriate response was for listeners to phone in and express a contrary view. It emphasised that the host’s opinion was his personally, and that although he hosted the programme, he was fully aware of the need to encourage other opinions. It stressed that talkback was only truly effective when people with opposing views phoned to express them.

Radio Pacific expressed its regret at any offence caused, but upheld the host’s right to freedom of speech. It added:

If these are his genuinely held personal views, …he is entitled to express them, just as you are at liberty to phone and tell the Radio Pacific audience that you do not agree with him. If we are to learn from the past and build a better New Zealand in the future, we must be prepared to listen to and weigh up the views and opinions of those we might not agree with, so that we have as complete a picture as possible of the way all New Zealanders feel about every issue.

Radio Pacific noted that Mrs Knight had demanded an explanation and an apology. It said it did not agree that an apology was in order. However, it agreed that the host should explain his position and therefore urged Mrs Knight to phone him on-air and insist that he did that.

Mrs Knight’s Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 8 August 1998

Dissatisfied with Radio Pacific’s response, Mrs Knight referred the complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

Mrs Knight stated that although she understood the argument about freedom of speech, she wanted the Authority to examine whether the host’s remarks breached standards G1, G4 or any other standard.

She wrote:

His comment on Japan was totally bitter, as he repeated "Japan is an enemy. We have been too soft on them. We need allies like America to protect us from enemies like Japan."

In Mrs Knight’s view, the host was not referring to World War II, but was clearly talking in current terms. She said she found his comments lacked decency and fairness and were distasteful.

Mrs Knight said it was not her intention to argue back with the host on-air, as was suggested to her, but to find out how far freedom of speech could go without breaching the programme standards.

Radio Pacific’s Response to the Authority – 17 August 1998

Radio Pacific examined the complaint under standards R1 and R5, which are the comparable Radio standards to the ones cited by Mrs Knight.

Dealing first with standard R1, which relates to truth and accuracy in news and current affairs programmes, the station noted first that the programme was a talkback programme. Therefore, it argued, it could not be said to be a current affairs or news programme. It noted that hosts and callers expressed opinions on a wide variety of topics, and at times their views were provocative and controversial. It wrote:

We cannot provide an opportunity for hosts to speak out freely, without at times causing some offence. Radio Pacific argues that John Banks is entitled to his views, just as his listeners are entitled to phone and share theirs. The opinions expressed by John were just that, namely opinions. Opinions do not need to be truthful or accurate unless they are presented as part of a news or current affairs programme and the Radio Pacific network does not consider "Breakfast with Banksie" falls into that category.

Next it turned to standard R5, which requires broadcasters to deal justly and fairly with any person referred to or taking part in the programme. Radio Pacific submitted that no person was named or referred to. It noted that the comments were directed to the Japanese as a nation. Whether those comments were truthful and accurate was not the point, it argued, as they were the host’s personal opinions.

Radio Pacific concluded:

Talkback is a robust medium. Because listeners can respond, immediately, if they hear something they find offensive or do not agree with, we believe the Authority should uphold the right of every participant to speak out freely unless there is a blatant breach of the Codes of Broadcasting Practice.

The station said it remained of the view that the complaint should not be upheld.

Mrs Knight’s Final Comment – 25 August 1998

Mrs Knight said that she understood the points made by Radio Pacific. However, she said, she wished to reiterate her desire to understand what was acceptable and what was not according to the Radio Codes.