BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

"It is estimated that 80 per cent of employees would steal from their employer if they

had the opportunity" was the caption printed on the screen at the end of an item on

Police Stop: Caught in the Action dealing with theft by a shop employee. The episode

of the programme containing this statement was broadcast at 7.30pm on 10 September

1996 on TV3.

Mr Craigie complained to TV3 Network Services Ltd that the statement discriminated

against employees as it made no mention of the percentage of employers who would

"short-pay" or otherwise steal from their employees if they had the opportunity.

On the basis that the statement neither deprecated employees to the extent necessary

to breach the standard, and nor did it disadvantage employees to the advantage of

employers, TV3 declined to uphold the complaint.

Dissatisfied with TV3's response when received, it having been delayed by a postal

strike, Mr Craigie referred his 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). As is its practice, the Authority

determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

Police Stop: Caught in the Action, a programme which uses actual examples of criminal

behaviour and law enforcement, included an item which showed the use of a hidden

camera to catch a shop employee who was stealing money as she sorted the day's

takings. As the item concluded, the following message was printed as a caption on the

screen:

It is estimated that 80 percent of employees would steal from their employer if

they had the opportunity.

Mr Craigie complained that the message discriminated against staff as it made no

mention of the percentage of employers who would steal in some way from their

employees if they had the opportunity.

TV3 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 sex, 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.

TV3 referred to Decision No: 86/92 where the Authority had said that denigration

required a high level of deprecation. As that level of denigration had not occurred on

this occasion, and arguing that the item did not encourage discrimination, TV3 declined

to uphold the complaint. With regard to the message screened, it continued:

The statement was made based upon an 'honesty' study, research that covered

theft of all items belonging to the employer, which included removal of pens,

paper and small items such as paper clips. The removal of that kind of

equipment by employees for personal use would generally be widespread and,

although not thought to be theft by employees, nevertheless is theft of an

employer's property. It was therefore a fair and accurate statement and, as the

item was looking at footage illustrating people "Caught in the Act", it was

entirely appropriate to use the statistic.

When he referred the complaint to the Authority, Mr Craigie maintained that the

caption in the item was misleading, as well as discriminatory, as it suggested, because

of the criminal behaviour to which it was related, that it was referring to theft of

money from an employer's till.

Because of the delay in receiving TV3's reply, probably caused by a postal strike, Mr

Craigie initially referred his complaint to the Authority on the basis that TV3 had not

responded within 20 working days. It appears that some letters crossed in the mail

and, as it is not now an issue, it is not a matter on which the Authority has had to rule.

The Authority draws to TV3's attention the fact that the definition of denigration,

contained in Decision No: 86/92, is no longer applicable. Because of the high level of

deprecation which the Authority believed was necessary to reach a finding that a

broadcast encouraged denigration, standard G13 was revised some years ago after

consultation with broadcasters to omit any reference to denigration. The wording

which has applied since February 1994 is that contained in standard G13 which is

cited above.

While the Authority accepts that one interpretation of the statement broadcast on

Police Stop: Caught in the Action could be taken as suggesting that employees, in

comparison with employers, are inherently dishonest and thus inherently inferior, it

considers that this interpretation is unduly restrictive given its context and the type of

the programme in which it was contained. In reality, most people are employees in

some sense.

Accordingly, in view of the fact that most people are employees in some sense, the

Authority does not accept that standard G13, which is based on s.21(1)(e)(iv) of the

Broadcasting Act 1989, is intended to refer to such a massive and amorphous

community group.

The Authority's conclusion on this point is reinforced when it takes into account the

generality of the statement portrayed on the screen. There was no mention in the item

of the source of the statement which, in view of its vagueness, the Authority considers

of doubtful relevance and, indeed, rather meaningless.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Judith Potter
Chairperson
12 December 1996

Appendix

Mr Craigie's Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 18 October

1996

On 17 September 1996 Malcolm Craigie of Upper Hutt complained to TV3 Network

Services Ltd about a comment made in the programme Police Stop: Caught in the Act

broadcast at 7.30pm on 10 September 1996.

In the letter to TV3, Mr Craigie recalled when writing to the Broadcasting Standards

Authority, he had complained about the comment which said that approximately 80%

of staff would steal from their employer if they had the opportunity. He believed that

the comment discriminated against employees as it made no mention of the percentage

of employers who would "short-pay" or otherwise steal from their staff if they had

the opportunity.

Mr Craigie said he received a reply from TV3 dated 25 September advising that his

complaint would be considered under standard G13 of the Television Code of

Broadcasting Practice. However, as he had not received a substantive reply to his

complaint within 20 working days, he referred it to the Broadcasting Standards

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

TV3's Response to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 24 October 1996

Explaining that Mr Craigie's complaint was received on 23 September and that a reply

was sent to him of 18 October (within the statutory time period), TV3 said it

appeared that the correspondence had crossed in the mail. It enclosed a copy of its 18

October letter to Mr Craigie.

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

Practice, TV3 said that in Decision No: 86/92, the Authority had defined "denigration"

as meaning the blackening of a group's reputation and, consequently, that a high level

of deprecation was necessary for a programme to encourage denigration.

Discrimination, it added, had been defined as any practice that makes "distinctions

between individuals as groups so as to disadvantage some and to advantage others". It

continued:

It is the TV3 Standards Committee's view that the reputations of employees of

this country were not blackened, that the statement did not encourage

denigration or discrimination against them, and did not disadvantage employees

and advantage employers.

The statement was made based upon an 'honesty' study, research that covered

theft of all items belonging to the employer, which included removal of pens,

paper and small items such as paper clips. The removal of that kind of

equipment by employees for personal use would generally be widespread and,

although not thought to be theft by employees, nevertheless is theft of an

employer's property. It was therefore a fair and accurate statement and, as the

item was looking at footage illustrating people "Caught in the Act", it was

entirely appropriate to use the statistic.

Mr Craigie's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 28 October

1996

Dissatisfied with TV3's response to his substantive complaint, Mr Craigie referred it

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

Acknowledging that TV3's reply could have been delayed by a postal strike, Mr

Craigie maintained, first, that approximately 80% of employers would also remove

things like pens, papers and other small items. Secondly, he argued that it was

inappropriate to include the statement after showing an employee stealing money

from her employer's till. The implication in the item, he argued, was that 80% of

employees will steal from their employer's till.

TV3's Response to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 12 November 1996

TV3 advised that it had no further comment to make on this complaint.