BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

All BSA's decisions on complaints 1990-present
BSA Decisions
Xiao and Radio New Zealand Ltd - 2025-014 (9 June 2025)

The Authority has not upheld an accuracy complaint concerning a Morning Report interview with the Problem Gambling Foundation’s Director of Advocacy and Public Health. The interview discussed a new secondary school programme aimed at educating young people about the risk of developing problem gambling habits from playing video games, referring in particular to ‘loot boxes’ in gaming which often cost real money. The interviewee’s statement alleged to be inaccurate was, ‘We know around the world that a lot of countries have banned loot boxes…’ which the complainant said was incorrect as only one country – Belgium – has banned loot boxes. The Authority found in the context of the full five-minute interview, which focused on the importance of educating young people about the dangers associated with gaming and risk of developing problem gambling habits, this statement was not a material point of fact.

Not Upheld: Accuracy

Foster and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2024-101 (9 June 2025)

The Authority has not upheld a complaint under the balance, accuracy, and fairness standards about a Q + A interview with David Seymour on the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill (Bill). The complainant alleged TVNZ’s reporting on the Bill, in this broadcast and in general, was biased; interviewer Jack Tame inaccurately claimed the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi is a partnership and erroneously cited the ‘Fleming version’ of the Treaty; and it was unfair to ‘only present one side of an argument’. The Authority found the balance standard does not apply to concerns of bias, and the audience was likely to be aware of significant perspectives on the Bill from this broadcast and other media coverage. It also found it was not misleading to suggest the Treaty/Te Tiriti is a partnership or cite the official English text of the Treaty. The fairness standard did not apply.

Not Upheld: Balance, Accuracy, Fairness

Bayliss and Central FM Ltd - 2024-092 (9 June 2025)

The Authority has upheld a complaint from Kathryn Bayliss about an item on Cockies Hour concerning a discussion between Steve Wyn-Harris and the Chair of the Tukituki Water Security Project after the project was included on the Fast-track Approvals Bill's list of projects released on 6 October 2024. The Authority agreed the description of the 22 hectares of Department of Conservation land needed for the dam project as ‘only stewardship land’, when approximately 93% of it has ‘conservation park status’, was a material inaccuracy which the broadcaster had not made reasonable efforts to avoid. The Authority also found the broadcaster failed to correct the error within a reasonable period after being put on notice.

Upheld: Accuracy

Orders: Section 13(1)(a) Broadcasting Act 1989 - statement published on air and online

Samuelson and Radio New Zealand Ltd - 2025-019 (26 May 2025)

The Authority has declined to determine a complaint alleging a brief news bulletin on Radio New Zealand’s RNZ Concert breached the balance and accuracy standards in reporting statements by US Vice President JD Vance. The Authority found in all the circumstances the complaint should not be determined as it amounted to the complainant’s personal preference regarding matters of editorial discretion and the complainant’s concerns about accuracy derived from a misinterpretation of the bulletin. 

Declined to Determine (s 11(b) of the Broadcasting Act 1989 - in all circumstances): Balance, Accuracy

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

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

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

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

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

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

1 ... 3 4 5 ... 81