At approximately 9.11pm during Kerre Woodham Talkback, the host said, “You fricken moron”, in response to a caller’s comment that having a disability was the result of “inbreeding”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the host’s comment breached the good taste and decency and responsible programming standards: the comment was broadcast after 9pm during a talkback programme targeted at adults, it would not have surprised or offended most listeners, and its broadcast in this context was not socially irresponsible.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Responsible Programming
All Decisions
During the ZM drive show Jay, Flynny and Jacqui, one of the hosts told a personal anecdote about a prank she committed in her youth, namely setting off a fire alarm, “resulting in all of Timaru’s fire engines turning up”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the host’s comments breached the law and order standard: the anecdote was a light-hearted recollection of the host’s actions in her youth intended to entertain, but with an educational message – the host made comments condemning her own behaviour and noting the repercussions – and the story did not invite imitation or otherwise encourage listeners to break the law.
Not Upheld: Law and Order
In an interview on Radio New Zealand National’s Checkpoint the Executive Director of the Rape Prevention Education Group stated, “I think our focus has to be on the safety of our children, and we know that approximately one in four girls and one in eight boys are likely to experience some form of sexual violence before the age of 16”. RNZ News later reported, “The group’s executive director, Kim McGregor, claims . . .” and repeated the figures. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the statement breached the accuracy standard: the Director’s comment was not a statement of fact but reflected her views and experiences, and was presented from an advocacy perspective, the figures were approximates and, while contentious, were supported by some independent research.
Not Upheld: Accuracy
A Close Up report profiled Māori activists and their views on the Government’s sale of state assets and proposed mining activities. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the item breached standards relating to good taste and decency, controversial issues, and discrimination and denigration: the views expressed by the activist represented one end of a political spectrum – they were described as radical and the audience would have understood that they were not representative of all Māori or young Māori; the item did not encourage the denigration of, or discrimination against, any section of the community; the interview focused on the activist and his brother and their political views; the reporter took a “devil’s advocate” approach, and the programme included viewer feedback.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Controversial Issues, Discrimination and Denigration
The question for the Authority was whether a complaint had been submitted within the time allowed. The complainant submitted two formal complaints about two broadcasts on Fair Go, using the broadcaster’s online complaint form. The broadcaster declined to accept the second complaint on the basis that it was out of time. Under the Broadcasting Act 1989 formal complaints must be lodged in writing with the broadcaster within 20 working days after the programme has screened. The complainant submitted his online complaint shortly before midnight on 28 June, the 20th working day after the broadcast. The definition of “working day” in section 2 of the Act specifies days of the year that are to be excluded but not times of day. The Authority held that the ordinary meaning of a “day” runs from midnight to midnight and that the complaint should have been accepted by the broadcaster. The Authority made an order directing the complaint back to the broadcaster to be accepted and considered as a formal complaint.
Order: Broadcaster to accept and consider complaint as a formal complaint
A promo for Two and a Half Men screened at 2.10pm during Anderson, a chat show rated G (General), as part of a montage of promos for ‘Comedy Wednesday’; it contained sexual innuendo and the word “penis”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the promo breached standards relating to good taste and decency, responsible programming, and children’s interests: the promo screened during a chat show targeted at adults and in an AO timeslot; the promo was light-hearted and intended to be humorous; the sexual content was sufficiently inexplicit, and the broadcaster adequately considered children’s interests.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Responsible Programming, Children’s Interests
During a discussion about gay marriage on Newstalk ZB’s Overnight Talkback, the host described the complainant, a caller, as “incredibly rude”. The host read out a fax from the complainant and repeated the word “homophobic” while spelling out “faggot”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the host’s comments breached the fairness and discrimination and denigration standards: while it was clear that the host disagreed with the complainant’s views, he did allow the complainant an opportunity to present his perspective and he was not abusive towards him; and the host’s use of the word “homophobic” and spelling out of “faggot” did not encourage the denigration of, or discrimination against, any section of the community.
Not Upheld: Fairness, Discrimination and Denigration
A book reading of Eggs, written by New Zealand author Maxine Alterio, was broadcast on Radio New Zealand National on Good Friday morning at 6.50am. The story was told from the perspective of an “at risk youth” who attended a Polytechnic course where she and her classmates looked after eggs in order to learn parenting skills. The story contained mature themes including references to drug taking and sex, as well as some coarse language. The Authority did not uphold complaints that the book reading breached the good taste and decency standard: it was an artistic work and the language and themes were acceptable in the context, and upholding the complaints would unjustifiably limit free speech.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency
During Michael Laws Talkback, broadcast two days running on Radio Live, the host discussed the results of a study conducted by Women’s Refuge and the SPCA which showed a link between domestic violence and animal abuse. The host made a number of comments critical of the women who took part in the study and of women who stayed in violent relationships because of their pets. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the host’s comments breached standards relating to good taste and decency, accuracy, and discrimination and denigration: talkback is a robust and opinionated environment; the comments amounted to the host’s personal opinion and the two programmes were balanced overall; the comments were limited to women who took part in the study and to those who stayed in violent relationships because of their pets, and the comments did not reach the necessary threshold for encouraging discrimination or denigration against any section of the community.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Accuracy, Discrimination and Denigration
In a 3 News report on the trials of the ‘Urewera Four’, the reporter referred to the original Urewera terror raids of 2007 and repeated the incorrect information that “17 people were arrested and initially charged under the Terrorism Suppression Act”. The broadcaster upheld the complaint that this statement was inaccurate because no one had been charged under that Act. It acknowledged that Mr Signer had previously alerted it to this error, and while it had removed the erroneous material from its website some of the material had been overlooked which “caused a repeat of the incorrect statement”. The broadcaster apologised and said it had sent a “strongly worded email” to all 3 News centres around the country. The Authority upheld the complaint that the action taken by the broadcaster was insufficient because the broadcaster should have broadcast a correction at the earliest appropriate opportunity. The Authority made no order.
Upheld: Accuracy (Action Taken)
No Order