A brief news item on Radio New Zealand News reported that a pedestrian had been hit by a bus in central Wellington. The item incorrectly referred to St John Ambulance as having transported the woman to hospital – in Wellington ambulance services are operated by Wellington Free Ambulance which is a separate organisation. However, the Authority did not uphold the complaint that the reference to St John Ambulance breached the accuracy and fairness standards: the reference was not material to the focus of the item and would not have misled listeners in any material respect, and Wellington Free Ambulance was not referred to so listeners would not have been left with an unfairly negative impression of it as an organisation.
Not Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness
An episode of What’s Really In Our Food?, a weekly television series investigating different food groups, and exploring the potential health benefits and/or risks associated with those foods, contained a fun human experiment to test the effects of Omega 3 on the attention span of young boys. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the accuracy standard: the experiment was clearly intended to be light-hearted and entertaining and did not purport to be scientifically rigorous or reliable, the conclusions drawn from the experiment were vague, and viewers would not have been misled.
Not Upheld: Accuracy
A segment on 3 News: Firstline included an interview with a spokesperson from the Sensible Sentencing Trust regarding a proposed amendment to the Parole Act 2002. The spokesperson expressed her view that the amendment “did not go far enough” and that parole hearings should be abolished altogether. The Authority upheld the complaint that this breached the controversial issues standard: the item discussed a controversial issue of public importance, and while the presenter alluded to the existence of other points of view, this did not go far enough – the broadcaster accepted that it had not made reasonable efforts, or given reasonable opportunities, to present alternative viewpoints. The Authority did not find a breach of the accuracy and fairness standards: the statements amounted to comment and opinion and were therefore exempt from standards of accuracy, the item was not misleading, and parole board members, prisoners, and victims of crime were all treated fairly. The Authority made no order.
Upheld: Controversial Issues
Not Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness
No Order
An item on Spectrum on Radio New Zealand National reported on The Nelson Ark APART programme, an eight-week dog training course designed to teach young people discipline, compassion and tolerance through empathy. A young female graduate was asked about her background and how she came to be on the programme. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the item had breached her privacy: the woman was not identifiable; she did not say she was raped, as the complainant alleged; and no private facts were disclosed in a manner that would be considered highly offensive, as the woman was a willing participant.
Not Upheld: Privacy
Two items on Fair Go investigated claims about a wooden gate manufacturer. Customers were interviewed about their experiences with the company and its director, and the item contained footage, filmed from a public footpath, of the company director at his workshop. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the item breached standards relating to privacy, law and order, controversial issues, fairness, accuracy, discrimination and denigration, and responsible programming: no private facts were disclosed about the director, and footage taken on his property was not broadcast; the impression created about him and his company was based on the opinions of customers, which were exempt from standards of accuracy; the director was provided with a fair and adequate opportunity to respond and the item included comprehensive summaries of his statement; and the broadcast was accurate in all material respects and would not have misled viewers on the essential issues.
Not Upheld: Good taste and Decency, Law and Order, Privacy, Controversial Issues, Accuracy, Fairness, Discrimination and Denigration, Responsible Programming
An item on Checkpoint reported that an Anglican Minister had been suspended for removing children from a youth camp to protect them from a man he believed was a sexual predator. The Authority upheld the complaint that the church and the Bishop had been treated unfairly: the broadcaster did not have a sufficient foundation for broadcasting such serious allegations and did not provide any corroborating evidence, and though the church was provided with a fair opportunity to comment, the item failed to adequately present their response. The Authority did not agree that the item breached the controversial issues and accuracy standards: it did not discuss a controversial issue of public importance and the Authority was not in a position to determine whether the impression of the alleged offending was misleading. The Authority made no order.
Upheld: Fairness
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues, Accuracy
No Order
An item on Te Kāea, broadcast on Māori Television, reported on an Anglican deacon who was allegedly stood down after making a complaint about a man he alleged had been the subject of a sexual abuse inquiry. The Authority upheld the complaint that this breached the accuracy and fairness standards: it is not the Authority's role to determine the nature of the the alleged sexual abuse and its portrayal in the item; the item omitted other reasons for the deacon's suspension, which was misleading; the item was unfair to the church and the Bishop because the broadcaster did not have a sufficient foundation for broadcasting serious allegations and did not appear to take any steps to corroborate the essential facts of the broadcast; and given the seriousness of the allegations, the church was not provided with a fair and reasonable opportunity to comment. The Authority did not agree that the item breached the controversial issues standard as it did not discuss a controversial issue of public importance.
The Authority made no order.
Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues
No Order
An item on 60 Minutes reported on a high profile immigration case involving a Chinese millionaire, disclosing his address and showing footage of his business assistant in the lobby of the apartment building where he lived. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the privacy standard: the address was not disclosed for the purposes of encouraging harassment and there was no evidence that harassment resulted from the disclosure; and the apartment building lobby was accessible to the public so neither the Chinese millionaire nor his business assistant had a reasonable expectation of privacy there.
Not Upheld: Privacy
A news item on 1XX News contained a summary of a BSA decision declining to uphold a complaint made by the complainant. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the summary breached the accuracy and balance standards: the item gave a fair summary of the Authority's findings and was not inaccurate or misleading, the brief news report did not amount to a discussion and the Authority's decision was not a controversial issue.
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues, Accuracy
A promo for Beyond the Darklands, a TV One series in which a clinical psychologist profiled notorious New Zealand criminals, included comments about the death of a toddler. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the promo breached the good taste and decency and responsible programming standards: while the subject matter of the upcoming episode was distressing, details of the abuse had been widely reported in the media, the promo was correctly classified PGR and screened during an appropriate host programme (The Force, a reality TV series about the work of police), and the promo itself was reserved and respectful.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Responsible Programming