BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary  

[This summary does not form part of the decision.] 

The Authority has declined to determine a complaint under various standards about an answer during the DUKE Quiz which, in identifying an astronaut who ‘did not set foot on the moon’, stated ‘but then, did anyone really land on the moon?’. The Authority considered the complaint was trivial and did not warrant determination.

Declined to Determine (section 11(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989 – trivial): Offensive and Disturbing Content, Promotion of Illegal or Antisocial Behaviour, Accuracy

The broadcast

[1]  The 26 November 2024 DUKE Quiz featured the question ‘Which Apollo 11 Astronaut did not set foot on the moon?’. Four possible answers were listed on-screen, with the broadcast then revealing the answer to be ‘A. Michael Collins – but then, did anyone really land on the moon?’.

The complaint

[2]  Sharon Lehany complained the broadcast breached the offensive and disturbing content, promotion of illegal or antisocial behaviour, and accuracy standards of the Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand for the following reasons:

• It was ‘very disturbing that a purportedly fact-based trivia quiz was overtly and publicly questioning whether the moon landings were a hoax’, especially considering ‘the current environment where mainstream media is under attack internationally’, including the rise of ‘fake news’ and conspiracy theories.
• Inclusion of the conspiracy theory may therefore suggest TVNZ ‘is promoting questioning the moon landings as a plausible and legitimate thing’, potentially emboldening the antiestablishment movement.
• ‘Although this may have been intended as a joke, there was no indication that it might have been tongue-in-cheek.’ Ultimately, the purpose of a trivia quiz is for participants to identify facts. Most of the programme was ‘presented as a straightforward series of trivia questions and answers’, and its tone was neutral and factual rather than light-hearted.
• It is problematic to suggest any reasonable person would have seen the broadcast as a joke. A significant proportion of the population believe in conspiracy theories, and a core issue with conspiracy theories is those who believe in the conspiracy do not see it as a joke.

The broadcaster’s response

[3]  Television New Zealand Ltd (TVNZ) did not uphold the complaint for the following reasons:

Offensive and disturbing content

• The purpose of this standard ‘is not to prohibit challenging material, or material that some people may find offensive. Its purpose is to ensure sufficient care is taken so that challenging material is played only in an appropriate context’.
• The DUKE Quiz is a light-hearted quiz aimed at adult audiences. The statement in question was a light-hearted and ‘clearly joking’ response to a question, consistent with the quiz’s typical ‘quirky and interesting topics’ and light-hearted tone.
• ‘A reasonable viewer would not consider it to be a realistic statement that the moon landing didn’t happen.’
• The statement was a ‘humorous reference to a well-known conspiracy theory’ that would not offend or disturb a significant number of viewers in the context of the broadcast.

Promotion of illegal and antisocial behaviour

• The quiz did not promote illegal or seriously antisocial behaviour. It was clear the statement was made in jest and that viewers would interpret the statement as such.

Accuracy

• The answer to the question was correct: Michael Collins did not set foot on the moon.
• The complaint regards a ‘joking comment’ but ‘the accuracy standard is not designed to regulate jokes’.

Outcome: Decline to determine

[4]  Section 11(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989 authorises the Authority to decline to determine a complaint if it considers the complaint is frivolous, vexatious, or trivial. A ‘trivial’ complaint is defined as one which is of little or no importance and is at such a level not to justify it being treated as a serious complaint.¹

[5]  We consider this complaint to be trivial. The broadcast does not raise any issues of broadcasting standards at a level which warrants our consideration for the following reasons:

• The statement complained about was a joke that did not contain any coarse language or sexually explicit material.²
• The complaint concerns an interpretation of the broadcast that we consider unlikely to represent the practical interpretation or understanding of reasonable New Zealand viewers.
• As recognised under the offensive and disturbing content standard, the feelings of the particularly sensitive cannot dictate what can be broadcast.³ Similarly, there is no general obligation on broadcasters to tailor content to those potentially affected by conspiracy theories.
• The arguments raised by the complainant do not identify any potential harms at a level requiring our intervention.
• The relevant issues were satisfactorily addressed in the broadcaster’s decision.

For the above reasons the Authority declines to determine the complaint under section 11(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989. 

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Susie Staley
Chair
22 April 2025  

 
Appendix

The correspondence listed below was received and considered by the Authority when it determined this complaint:

1  Lehany’s original complaint – 28 November 2024

2  TVNZ’s decision – 23 December 2024

3  Lehany’s referral to the Authority – 25 December 2024

4  TVNZ’s confirmation of no further comments – 9 January 2025

¹ Broadcasting Standards Authority | Te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho “Guidance: BSA power to decline to determine a complaint” <bsa.govt.nz>
² For a similar finding, see Francis and Television New Zealand Ltd, Decision No. 2021-114 at [5]
³ Commentary: Offensive and Disturbing Content, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 8