BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

One of a dozen escaped capuchin monkeys "had to be destroyed" because it could not

be captured, according to a news item on National Radio on 17 April 1997 at 6.00pm.

S V R Young of Christchurch complained to Radio New Zealand Ltd that it was

incorrect to state that the monkey "had to be" destroyed, as that presented a point of

view as if it were a proven fact. In the complainant's view, the item should have

stated that the monkey "was" destroyed. Because RNZ did not respond, S V R

Young referred the complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(b)

of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

When RNZ was asked to respond to the complaint, it maintained that the phrase "had

to be destroyed" did not mean that there was no other option, but that the monkey

was subjected to destruction. It declined to uphold the complaint.

Dissatisfied with that decision, S V R Young referred the complaint to the

Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Act for investigation and

review.

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

Decision

The members of the Authority have read a transcript of the item complained about

and have read the correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). In this instance, the

Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

The following news item was broadcast on National Radio at 6.00pm on 17 April:

Two fifteen year-olds will appear in the youth Court in New Plymouth

tomorrow in connection with the release of several monkeys from Brooklands

Zoo two weeks ago.

The pair are charged with intentional damage.

A dozen capuchin monkeys escaped and all but one were back in their cage

within a day.

However, one evaded all attempts to recapture it for five days and, when it

was located, had to be destroyed.

S V R Young complained that the final phrase was incorrect. It should have said, he

wrote, either "and was destroyed" or "had to be destroyed according to those who

destroyed it".

When RNZ dealt with the complaint under standard R1 of the Radio Code of

Broadcasting Practice, it maintained that the standard was not breached. It referred to

the use of the idiom "had to be destroyed" in items about animals being killed for their

own safety or the safety of others. Standard R1 requires broadcasters:

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

programmes.

The correspondence summarised in the Appendix records the varying views advanced

by S V R Young and RNZ on the alternative meanings of the phrase used.

In a final comment, S V R Young acknowledged that the item was relatively trivial

(other than for the monkey involved), but maintained that if a matter was important

enough to be dealt with as a news item, then it should be dealt with accurately.

The Authority agrees with the complainant that the item dealt with a relatively trivial

matter. It is also of the view that the complaint does not raise a matter which is

central to the maintenance of broadcasting standards. Indeed, when the complaint was

referred to the Authority, S V R Young acknowledged that the complaint was largely

now an exercise to see whether the complaints procedure worked.

Accordingly, while it understands and appreciates the technical matter raised, the

Authority concludes that the broadcast of the news item did not breach the standards.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
17 July 1997

Appendix

S V R Young's Complaint to Radio New Zealand Ltd - 17 April 1997

S V R Young of Christchurch complained to Radio New Zealand Ltd about a news

item broadcast on 17 April 1997 at 6.00pm. The report stated that one of the dozen

capuchin monkeys which escaped from captivity in New Plymouth was located after

five days and "had to be destroyed".

In S V R Young's view, this was incorrect. The report should have stated "and was

destroyed", or alternatively "had to be destroyed according to those who destroyed

it". The complainant added that the report should not have presented a point of view

as if it were a proven fact, and concluded:

I trust that you will speedily rectify this error to save me the trouble of having

to pursue this matter to the highest echelons of the Broadcasting Authority.

S V R Young's Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 15 May

1997

Having received no response from RNZ, S V R Young referred the complaint to the

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

The complainant wrote:

The matter is not one of great moment but if the news section of Radio NZ

cannot be bothered to show any interest in accuracy in small matters how can

its news be trusted on the larger scheme of things.

This same news item was published in the Christchurch Press at about the

same time. This publication had no difficulty in providing an accurate report.

RNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint - 2 June 1997

RNZ responded to the complaint as requested by the Authority. It advised the

complainant that it did not know what became of the original letter.

The story complained of read:

Two 15 year-olds will appear in the Youth Court in New Plymouth tomorrow

in connection with the release of several monkeys from Brooklands Zoo two

weeks ago.

The pair are charged with intentional damage.

A dozen capuchin monkeys escaped and all but one were back in their cage

within a day.

However, one evaded all attempts to recapture it for five days and, when it

was located, had to be destroyed.

RNZ considered the complaint under standard R1 of the Radio Code of Broadcasting

Practice, which requires accuracy on points of fact. It noted that the complainant

considered the words "had to be destroyed" to be inaccurate. It concluded that the

meaning put on that phrase by the complainant was "had no other option but". While

this meaning is found in some colloquial speech, it did not appear in standard

dictionaries. RNZ quoted the Heinemann New Zealand dictionary giving a meaning of

"must, is required to", and the Oxford English Reference Dictionary as "be burdened

with or committed to". It was not the same, it continued, as "have no option".

RNZ also pointed out that the idiom "had to be destroyed" was used in items about

animals being killed for their own safety or the safety of others. When it was used in

that sense, the listener knew that there was usually an alternative course of treatment

available, but the distress involved for the animal should the alternative course be

adopted, was usually considered unwarranted.

In recommending that the complaint be not upheld, RNZ's Complaints Committee

concluded:

In the Committee's view the degree of exactitude required by the complainant

would render the normal process of news broadcasting impossible, as

qualification after qualification obscured facts.

S V R Young's Final Comment - 20 June 199

As RNZ neither defended its use of language nor criticised the Shorter Oxford

dictionary, S V R Young said that it appeared that RNZ considered the complaint to

be trivial for everyone - except, S V R Young commented by way of an aside, perhaps

for the monkey.

Nevertheless, S V R Young wrote, regardless of the item's inherent newsworthiness, it

was important enough to be included in a news bulletin, then it was important enough

to be covered accurately.