BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

The concern about the growing number of accidents in both Australia and New

Zealand involving drivers who had taken drugs, as distinct from those affected by

alcohol, was reported in a news item broadcast on Tonight at about 9.30pm on 3 April

1997.

Mr Currie complained to the broadcaster, Television New Zealand Ltd, that the item

was misleading. As it did not refer to research on the limited effect of marijuana on

driving behaviour, he said that the item was just another "marijuana demonising stunt".

Pointing out that the item was an accurate and impartial account of an Australian

conference and the reaction in New Zealand, TVNZ declined to uphold the complaint.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's decision, Mr Currie 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). On this occasion, the Authority

determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

A news item broadcast on Tonight reported that a parliamentary road safety

committee in the State of Victoria had expressed concern about a growing number of

accidents involving drivers who had taken drugs – as distinct from those affected by

alcohol – and the fact that there were no readily available tests to detect drugs. The

item included interviews with a doctor in Auckland, and with a representative from the

New Zealand Automobile Association, who endorsed these concerns.

Mr Currie complained to TVNZ that the item was "completely misleading".

Insufficient research data was presented, he wrote, to enable the viewer to decide

whether the committee's conclusions about the effect of all drugs (other than alcohol)

were based on sound research. Such material was necessary, he continued, as a prior

study in Victoria in 1994 had concluded that drivers who used cannabis were no more

likely to be killed or injured than cannabis free drivers. TVNZ, he maintained, was

disseminating misleading information in an item he described as a "marijuana

demonising stunt".

TVNZ assessed the complaint under standard G14 of the Television Code of

Broadcasting Practice. It reads:

G14   News must be presented accurately, objectively and impartially.

Explaining that the item was a report of the Australian conference which expressed

concerns that road deaths involving drugs might outnumber those involving alcohol,

TVNZ said it was appropriate for the news item to investigate the situation in New

Zealand. It denied that the item involved the demonising of marijuana.

When he referred his complaint to the Authority, Mr Currie referred to the specific

research on the effect of marijuana on drivers, and insisted that the item was

misleading.

The Authority begins its assessment of the complaint by referring to the item which

was complained about. It notes that the item was a news story about a conference in

Sydney to which there was added some local follow-up. It was not presented as a

debate, or a current affairs item, about the effect of drugs on drivers.

The Authority does not accept that the item "demonised" marijuana. The item

referred to drugs which, no doubt, included marijuana and, indeed, the visuals focused

on the use of marijuana. It is a drug of which the Authority suspects many New

Zealanders have some knowledge – especially compared with the types of drugs which

are sometimes known as "hard" or "designer" drugs. Given the conference's finding

covered in the item, the Authority considers that the focus on marijuana as a generic

was acceptable.

With regard to the complaint and given the scope of the news item complained about,

and the comments included to give a New Zealand perspective on a concern expressed

in Australia, the Authority concludes that standard G14 was not contravened.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
July 1997

Appendix

Mr Currie's Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd - 6 April 1997

David Currie of Petone complained to Television New Zealand Ltd about a news item

on Tonight broadcast at about 9.30pm on 3 April 1997. The item reported that illegal

drugs were in danger of outstripping alcohol as a cause of road deaths in Victoria,

Australia.

Mr Currie described the item as "a sham and completely misleading". Noting that the

source of the item was the politician who led a Victorian parliamentary road safety

committee, Mr Currie maintained that insufficient data was given for the study to be

assessed properly. He then referred to a Victorian study in 1994 which, in his

opinion, concluded that drivers who used cannabis were no more likely to be killed or

injured than cannabis free drivers, and he wrote:

The readiness with which TV1 news featured this latest Australian political

item, which I think is just another marijuana demonising stunt, has made me very

angry and I can't help feeling that TV1 has allowed itself to become little more

than a propaganda station for disseminating misleading marijuana information on

behalf of marijuana prohibitionists in the New Zealand government.

Writing as a member of DPEC (Drug Policy and Education Council), Mr Currie said he

would withdraw his complaint, first, if advised of the source of the report on which

the item was based, and secondly, if TVNZ broadcast an item providing details of the

1994 study he referred to.

When advised by TVNZ that it intended to assess the complaint under standard G14

of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice, Mr Currie responded (on 14 April)

by stating that balance was his principal concern. He expressed concern that the item

on 3 April reported the conclusions of a "dubious political group", while omitting the

different conclusions from other, earlier substantive research.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint - 9 May 1997

After explaining to Mr Currie in a letter dated 5 May that it was unable to respond to

his complaint within 20 working days because of the absence overseas of the Chair of

the Complaints Committee, TVNZ began:

The item based on a major road safety conference then being held in Australia,

told of concern on both sides of the Tasman about the growing number of

accidents involving drivers who had taken drugs, as distinct from those affected

by alcohol. It was noted that road safety tests designed to detect alcohol do not

recognise the presence of other drugs.

TVNZ explained that the item was a report of the conference. It was not a debate

about marijuana and driving, and because the gathering expressed concerns that road

deaths involving drugs might soon outnumber those involving alcohol, it was

appropriate for that concern to be expressed and for the situation in New Zealand to

be

examined. After summarising the item's contents, TVNZ maintained that it was a

straightforward news piece, which was competently handled.

TVNZ rejected Mr Currie's contentions that the story emanated from a dubious group

or involved demonising marijuana. It considered the other studies cited to be of little

relevance, and concluded.

Having examined the Tonight item, TVNZ is satisfied that it was an accurate,

objective and impartial account of what was said at the Sydney conference and

the reaction caused here. We do not believe G14 was endangered and

accordingly your complaint was not upheld.

Mr Currie's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 29 May 1997

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Mr Currie referred his complaint to the

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

He said that the item was unbalanced as TVNZ neither referred to his 1994 media

release, nor to the effect of different drugs. Reporting that a presenter had stated that

"Drugs may become bigger road killers then booze", he wrote:

But for a driver who had used only marijuana this statement would be untrue on

the basis of the American and Australian studies mentioned in my media release

of 1994 which pointed out that the chance of a driver who had taken only

marijuana getting killed or badly injured was no more than for a drug-free user.

Describing the presenter's comment as misleading, Mr Currie said that the politician

screened also made a misleading statement when insinuating that drugs were at present

killing as many drivers as alcohol. Mr Currie referred to the research which cast doubt

on this material, observing:

It is unreasonable to assume drivers with marijuana in their systems, or for

arguments sake drivers with caffeine in their systems, will have the same level of

culpability as drivers with alcohol in their systems. Marijuana and caffeine are

different to alcohol.

Turning to the item complained about, Mr Currie maintained that the item was

political in that it included comments from a politician rather than a road safety expert.

He persisted in his contention that the item demonised marijuana in view of the way

marijuana was portrayed.

Mr Currie concluded by stating that the comments in his 1994 press release were

verifiable and said that the research reported at that time had an impact on the findings

contained in the item on 3 April.

TVNZ's Response to the Authority - 4 June 1997

TVNZ advised that it did not wish to comment further.