BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

All BSA's decisions on complaints 1990-present
All Decisions
Hall and Radio New Zealand Ltd - 2025-016 (26 May 2025)

Warning: This decision contains language some readers may find offensive. 

The Authority has not upheld a complaint under multiple standards about an episode of “It’s Personal with Anika Moa”, including the f-word and other swear words.  In the context, including the ‘colourful language’ warning preceding the broadcast, the Authority found it was unlikely to cause widespread disproportionate offence or distress, and audiences were provided with sufficient opportunity to protect children in their care from hearing inappropriate content.  The Authority also found the swearing was unlikely to promote the behaviours contemplated under the promotion of illegal or antisocial behaviour standard.

Not Upheld: Offensive and Disturbing Content, Children’s Interests, Promotion of Illegal or Antisocial Behaviour

Watkin and Radio New Zealand Ltd - 2025-006 (26 May 2026)

The Authority has not upheld a complaint Radio New Zealand’s news headlines regarding the government’s anticipated plans for replacement of the Interislander ferries breached the accuracy standard. The complainant said the headlines, stating the government’s plan was ‘reportedly to buy two smaller ships for $900 million, much more than the $551 million Labour’s paid’, were ‘mischievous’ noting the government’s intention to reduce costs, the ship cost component was implied to be ‘total project costs’ suggesting a substantial increase, and the comparisons of partial costs were ‘meaningless and speculation.’ The Authority found the headlines were comment or opinion to which the accuracy standard does not apply. It also found they were not misleading, noting listeners would appreciate there was more to a story than could be conveyed in a brief headline and, in the context of the broadcast as a whole, it was clear the headlined costs were not ‘total project costs’ and the government expected its planned project to be cheaper. While acknowledging the headlines were provocative, the Authority identified no harm justifying its intervention.

Not Upheld: Accuracy

Mayes and NZME Radio Ltd - 2025-015 (26 May 2025)

In a Newstalk ZB interview, Ryan Bridge spoke with New Zealand actress Luciane Buchanan about her lead role in the popular Netflix show The Night Agent. While discussing the casting process during COVID-19 lockdown, Buchanan admitted to breaking lockdown bubble rules to rehearse for her audition. Bridge said he was ‘glad’ she did so, given her success, and remarked rules were ‘made to be broken’. The complainant said the comments breached the offensive and disturbing content, and promotion of illegal or antisocial behaviour standards. While recognising the comments may offend some listeners, the Authority found they did not seriously violate community standards of taste and decency. It also concluded that although the comments could be interpreted as condoning Buchanan’s actions, they were unlikely, in the context, to incite others to break the law or ‘promote illegal or serious antisocial behaviour’ as contemplated by the standard.  

Not Upheld: Offensive and Disturbing Content, Promotion of Illegal or Antisocial Behaviour

Kammler and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2025-018 (26 May 2025)

The Authority has not upheld a complaint that a 1News item on the government’s proposed amendments to expand citizen’s arrest powers, as part of its efforts to address retail crime, breached the balance standard. The complaint alleged the report ‘crossed the line’ into political bias by focusing on violent robberies and interviewees expressing concerns about increased danger and vigilantism, while failing to mention the proposed changes were intended to address incidents such as supermarket shoplifting. The Authority found the balance standard had not been breached as the item included significant perspectives on the government’s proposal, including comments from Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith’s announcement. It also noted the standard does not apply to the complainant’s concerns about bias.

Not Upheld: Balance

Farr and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2025-009 (26 May 2025)

The Authority has not upheld a complaint alleging a clarification broadcast by 1News, stating ‘Israel says it does not target civilians in any of its actions’, breached the accuracy standard because the statement was a ‘blatant inaccuracy’. The Authority found the broadcast did not state as fact that Israel does not target civilians. It accurately reported Israel’s official position and clearly attributed the statement to Israel.

Not Upheld: Accuracy

Mooney and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2024-099 (29 April 2025)

The Authority has not upheld a complaint about an item on 1News about a spate of dog attacks in South Auckland. During the item’s introduction, an image of a black and white dog was depicted behind the presenter. The complainant said the image was of a Staffordshire Bull Terrier (‘Staffy) and its use may erroneously ‘encourage viewers to be fearful of Staffies, maybe even encouraging mistreatment’. The Authority found use of the image would not have caused viewers to fear or mistreat Staffies. The item did not suggest certain dog breeds are dangerous. The discrimination and denigration standard did not apply.

Not Upheld: Discrimination and Denigration, Accuracy

Jervis & Robertson and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2024-103 (29 April 2025)

The Authority has upheld two complaints concerning the accuracy of a brief 1News item on 15 November 2024 about heightened security in Paris following violence the previous week around a football match between Ajax and Maccabi Tel Aviv in Amsterdam. The item reported, ‘Thousands of police are on the streets of Paris over fears of antisemitic attacks…That's after 60 people were arrested in Amsterdam last week when supporters of a Tel Aviv football team were pursued and beaten by pro-Palestinian protesters.’ TVNZ upheld the complaints under the accuracy standard on the basis the item ‘lacked the nuance’ of earlier reporting on the events, by emphasising the ‘antisemitic’ descriptor while omitting to mention the role of the Maccabi fans in the lead-up to the violence. The Authority agreed with this finding and further found the action taken by TVNZ was insufficient. The broadcaster accepted more care should have been taken, but did not appear to have taken any action in response or made any public acknowledgement of the inaccuracy. The remaining standards raised in the complaints were not breached or did not apply.

Upheld: Accuracy (action taken). Not Upheld: Discrimination and denigration, Balance, Fairness. No Order 

Maggs and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2025-007 (29 April 2025)

The Authority has declined to determine a complaint regarding a news item about future upgrades to Wellington Airport infrastructure, including new runway technology designed to allow larger planes to land in the capital. The complainant said the item lacked balance and accuracy as the story was illustrated with some footage of windy conditions in Wellington, instead of showing Wellington on calm and windy days. As this complaint relates to a matter of editorial discretion and personal preference, it is not capable of being determined by a complaints procedure. The Authority considered that, in all circumstances of the complaint, it should not be determined by the Authority.  

Declined to determine (section 11(b) Broadcasting Act 1989, in all the circumstances):  Balance, Accuracy

Minto and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2025-002 (29 April 2025)

The Authority has upheld an accuracy complaint from John Minto on behalf of Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa about 1News’ reporting of violence that unfolded in Amsterdam surrounding a football match between the local team Ajax and Israel’s Maccabi Tel Aviv. The reporting comprised a pre-ad-break trailer reporting ‘antisemitic violence’, an introduction by the presenter which included a montage of ‘disturbing’ footage of violence described by Amsterdam’s mayor as ‘an explosion of antisemitism’, and a pre-recorded BBC item.

The broadcaster upheld one aspect of the complaint, relating to mischaracterised footage used in the trailer and introduction, which was originally reported as showing Israeli fans being attacked, but later corrected by Reuters and other outlets to indicate it showed Israeli fans chasing and attacking one Dutch man. The Authority considered the footage contributed to a materially misleading impression created by TVNZ’s framing of the events, with an emphasis on antisemitic violence against Israeli fans without acknowledging the role of the Maccabi fans in the violence – despite that being reported elsewhere prior to this 1News item.

A majority of the Authority did not consider TVNZ had made reasonable efforts to ensure accuracy; the background to these events was highly sensitive and more care should have been taken in framing the story so as not to overstate, or adopt without question, the ‘antisemitic’ angle. The minority considered it was reasonable for TVNZ to rely on Reuters, the BBC and the views of Dutch officials who described the violence as ‘antisemitic’, in the context of a developing story overseas in which not all facts were clear at the time of this broadcast.

The Authority considered TVNZ should have issued a correction when it became aware of the error with the footage. It therefore found the action taken was insufficient but considered publication of this decision adequate remedy in the circumstances.

Upheld: Accuracy.

Not Upheld: Balance.

No Order

Hamilton and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2025-005 (29 April 2025)

The Authority has declined to determine a complaint alleging an interview with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon on Q & A was unbalanced. The Authority found the balance standard did not apply to the concerns raised, the broadcaster’s decision had adequately responded to the concerns and the complaint related to matters of editorial discretion and personal preference. The Authority considered, in all the circumstances of the complaint, it should not be determined by the Authority.

Declined to determine (section 11 (b) of the Broadcasting Act 1989, in all the circumstances): Balance

1 2 3 ... 446