BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

A promo for 60 Minutes, shown on 15 February 1998 on TV One, included an item on

the 1998 Hero Parade and the council's decision not to fund it. In it, the interviewee

referred to several named councillors as "morons". This was preceded by some

comment from one of the councillors named by the interviewee.

Mrs Hale complained to the broadcaster, Television New Zealand Limited, that the

promo was not a true reflection of the programme or the views expressed in it. While

"morons" might reflect a genuinely-held opinion, it was degrading, insulting and

inappropriate, she wrote.

The comment was the expression of genuinely-held opinion, TVNZ responded, and

was balanced by comment from the named councillor whose views might be seen as

equally controversial. In declining to uphold the complaint, the broadcaster suggested

that the promo indicated the polarisation of community opinion on the issue.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Mrs Hale referred her 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.

The 1998 Hero Parade aroused considerable public controversy after the Auckland

City Council decided not to contribute funds towards its cost. A 60 Minutes

programme examined the controversy and the council's decision. The programme was

preceded by a promo shown on TV One on 15 February.

Mrs Hale of Auckland complained about the promo which featured the interviewee

(Bill Ralston) naming three councillors and referring to them as "morons". It also

featured one of the councillors who had been named stating that "people choose

whether they are going to be heterosexual or homosexual, it's a choice". The

complainant contended that the use of the word "morons" was inappropriate, even if

it resulted from the user's genuinely-held opinion. She said the description was

unbalanced and unfair. Mrs Hale also complained that the promo did not truly reflect

the programme or the overall views expressed in it.

TVNZ assessed the complaint under standards G4, G6, G13 and G19, as had been

nominated by Mrs Hale. These require broadcasters:

G4    To deal justly and fairly with any person taking part or referred to in

any programme.

G6    To show balance, impartiality and fairness in dealing with political

matters, current affairs and all questions of a controversial nature.

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.

Finally, the last nominated standard provides that:

G19    Care must be taken in the editing of programme material to ensure that

the extracts used are a true reflection and not a distortion of the original

event or the overall views expressed.

TVNZ agreed that the promo contained the interviewee observing that certain council

members were "morons", claiming that the comment was the expression of a

genuinely-held opinion. It was a broadcaster's obligation, TVNZ added, to

acknowledge an individual's right to express an opinion. The interviewee's comment

was balanced, it claimed, by the inclusion of the comment from the councillor. The

comments in the promo indicated that the programme would show that opinion on

council funding of the parade was polarised. The broadcaster declined to uphold the

complaint.

When she referred the complaint to the Authority, Mrs Hale did not agree that the

interviewee's and the councillor's comments in the promo could be compared. The

councillor's comment was acceptably expressed, albeit controversial, she wrote, while

the interviewee's comment named individuals and used a derogatory word to describe

them. Referring to TVNZ's claim that it was not in the business of telling people that

they might not express their opinions as they chose, Mrs Hale replied that the

broadcaster chose to include the interviewee's comment in the promo, when that was

only a small proportion of all the opinions collected in the making of the 60 Minutes

programme.

In its consideration of this complaint, the Authority takes into account the context

and manner in which the word "morons" was used. The Hero Parade itself and the

council's decision not to contribute towards its cost had generated strong opinion in

the community. The Authority, in an earlier decision (Decision No. 1998-043)

concluded that the colloquial use of the word "morons" was not uncommon in general

parlance in New Zealand. Here, the Authority considers the word used by the

interviewee was vigorous opinionated comment. It appreciates that the promo was

designed to attract viewers to the programme. The promo reflected one view in the

debate which was to be the focus of the actual programme. In deciding on the manner

in which the word was used, the Authority in this instance subsumes standard G6

under standard G4, as it considers that fairness, not balance, was the central issue

raised by the broadcast of the brief promo. On the issue raised under standard G4, the

Authority reiterates the conclusion it reached in its earlier decision, that it is not unfair

to describe someone as a "moron" in view of the accepted relatively light-hearted

colloquial meaning given to this term in New Zealand.

In considering whether the use of the word "morons" involved a breach of standard

G13, the Authority is of the view that, even if its expression was marginally

discriminatory, the excerpt depicted an opinion which reflected the interviewee's

reaction to the council's action. It thus falls within the exemption provided for in

standard G13(ii) and, accordingly, its use does not contravene the standard. The

Authority notes that standard G19 does not apply to promos; it relates to editing of

material contained within the programme itself.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
23 July 1998

Appendix

Jenny Hale's Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd – 3 March 1998

Mrs Hale of Auckland complained to the broadcaster about a trailer or promo shown

on TV One on 15 February 1998. The promo referred viewers to a forthcoming 60

Minutes programme which would examine the 1998 Hero Parade in Auckland and the

council's decision not to fund it.

In her complaint, Mrs Hale noted that a major part of the promo was an extract from

the programme which showed the interviewee (Bill Ralston) naming three councillors

and referring to them as "morons". She claimed that the extract was in breach of

standards G4 and G6 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. Using the

insulting comment "moron" failed to follow programme standards, she wrote, and did

not show balance, impartiality or fairness to the person so called. The promo did not,

she also wrote, reflect the programme with any balance, impartiality or fairness.

The complainant also contended that the promo was in breach of standards G13 and

G19 of the Code. Arguing that the expression "moron" was a degrading term to use

about anyone in an advertisement or a programme, she wrote that its use was

inappropriate even if it was the expression of a genuinely-held opinion. The

interviewee was eloquent enough to choose apt but less insulting words, she wrote,

and the programme-makers should not have included the statement. In considering

standard G19, Mrs Hale contended that the extract used in the promo was not a true

reflection of the report or the overall views expressed. She wrote:

The standards required of a programme are also the standards required of any

advertising for that programme.

In conclusion, the complainant stressed that she objected to the promo because it was

taken out of the context of the programme, it was repetitive, it did not reflect the

programme, and it was insulting to the people concerned.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint – 18 March 1998

TVNZ considered the complaint in the context of the standards which had been

nominated by Mrs Hale. It agreed that the promo:

...does indeed contain [the interviewee] making the controversial observation

that certain members of the council (those opposed to council contributing

money to the Hero Parade) are "morons". The comment is seen as an

expression of "genuinely-held opinion" as is allowed for in standard G13...and

is in accordance with the obligation of broadcasters (in G3) to "acknowledge

the right of individuals to express their own opinions".

The broadcaster opined that if the promo had only included comment from the

presenter, then the complaint might have had validity. But, it wrote, it included a

comment from one of the people named by the presenter, and that comment could

have been seen as equally controversial. Therefore, TVNZ claimed, the promo

properly indicated that the programme would show that opinion on the issue of

council funding of the Hero parade was polarised.

In denying that standards G4, G13 or G19 were breached, TVNZ noted that the

standards explicitly encouraged the expression of genuinely-held opinion in a news

and current affairs context. The expression used, it argued, was an opinion and

properly reflected the interviewee's reaction to the council's actions. Standard G6

was not breached, the broadcaster wrote, because the promo contained comment from

both sides in the debate. The other side on the promo represented an equally

controversial view, it stressed, and it came from one of the people named as

"morons". That less insulting words could have been chosen was not a matter for the

broadcaster, TVNZ wrote in reference to G13, for:

We are not in the business of telling people that they may not express their

genuinely-held opinions in the manner they choose.

While regretting that Mrs Hale was offended by the trailer, TVNZ declined to uphold

any breach of the standards.

Mrs Hale's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 16 April 1998

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Mrs Hale referred her complaint to the

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

Referring to TVNZ's contention that the promo contained comments from two

parties and that each was similarly controversial, Mrs Hale denied that the comments

could be compared. One, she wrote, used peoples' names and referred to them as

"morons"; the other "used no-one's name, and used no insulting terms". The latter

comment was perhaps controversial, but acceptably expressed and not insulting or

offensive to anyone, the complainant noted. The latter comment, Mrs Hale

contended, named individuals and used a derogatory word to describe them.

In reference to TVNZ's claim that it was not in the business of telling people that

they might not express their opinions as they chose, Mrs Hale wrote that, while that

claim was true, what TVNZ did choose to do was to include the interviewee's

comment in the promo. What, she wrote, was actually included in the programme was

only a small proportion of all the opinions gathered by reporters when making the

programme. The broadcaster:

...did very positively choose what to include so in actual fact anything in the

programme was specifically chosen by TVNZ. The programme director did

not use the word but it was clearly his choice to include it.

TVNZ's Comments to the Authority – 24 April 1998

The broadcaster wrote that it had nothing to add to its earlier letter to Mrs Hale:

...save to emphasise again that the intent of the trailer was to show that the

debate on the Hero Parade which would feature in 60 Minutes would reflect a

polarised community.

Mrs Hale's Final Comment

When asked if she wished to make a final comment, Mrs Hale did not respond.