BSA Decisions Ngā whakatau a Te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Ip Man, a well-regarded movie about a martial arts legend, based on historical events, was broadcast in various timeslots during children’s viewing times. The broadcaster accepted that the movie was incorrectly classified ‘M’ when it should have been AO, and that it should have been broadcast in the AO time-band, not during children’s viewing times, but it nevertheless declined to uphold the complaint. The Authority upheld the complaint that the inappropriate classification and timeslots meant that the broadcast breached standards relating to responsible programming, children’s interests and violence. The Authority did not, however, uphold the complaint that it breached the good taste and decency, controversial issues, and discrimination and denigration standards: viewers would not have been surprised or offended by the content in the context of a martial arts movie; the movie was not a news, current affairs or factual programme so the controversial issues standard did not apply; the discrimination and denigration standard was not intended to prevent the broadcast of legitimate drama, and the movie did not encourage the denigration of, or discrimination against, a section of the community. The Authority made no order.

Upheld: Responsible Programming, Children’s Interests, Violence
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Controversial Issues, Discrimination and Denigration

No Order

Prime News used a pre-recorded BBC item reporting on controversial comments by Top Gear television presenter Jeremy Clarkson that striking workers should be shot. A complaint that this breached standards relating to controversial issues, accuracy, fairness and responsible programming was not upheld: the focus of the item was the comment made by Mr Clarkson which caused controversy – therefore it was not misleading to omit footage of other comments; the item was a brief snapshot of the response to Mr Clarkson’s comments and did not amount to a discussion of a controversial issue that was of public importance in New Zealand; there is a higher threshold for finding unfairness to a public figure; and viewers were not disadvantaged or deceived by the clip of Mr Clarkson’s comments.

Not Upheld: Controversial Issues, Accuracy, Fairness, Responsible Programming

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

Promos for The Almighty Johnsons, Sons of Anarchy and Terra Nova were broadcast during Dr Phil at approximately 1.30pm. The promos briefly showed images of weapons, including a knife and guns. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that these promos breached standards relating to good taste and decency, children’s interests and violence: the promos did not contain any AO material, they were appropriately classified PGR and screened during Dr Phil which was classified AO, and the broadcaster had exercised sufficient care and discretion in dealing with the issue of violence.

Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Children’s Interests, Violence

An episode of Homeland, a fictional drama series in which the CIA investigates a possible terrorist threat, had a storyline involving Muslims versus a “righteous America”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the episode promoted “Islamophobia” and breached the discrimination and denigration standard: the standard was not intended to prevent the broadcast of legitimate drama, and the programme did not encourage the denigration of, or discrimination against, a section of the community.

Not Upheld: Discrimination and Denigration

In a One News report on the Australian Open Tennis Championships, Serena Williams’ performance was described as “almost schizophrenic”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the discrimination and denigration and accuracy standards: the term “schizophrenic” was being used colloquially, the comment did not carry any invective or malice and was not used to encourage discrimination against, or denigration of, people with mental illness as a section of the community; the use of the term “schizophrenic” was not a statement of fact – it amounted to commentary and was therefore exempt from the standards of accuracy.

Not Upheld: Accuracy, Discrimination and Denigration

A 3 News report on the Government’s asset sales policy included excerpts from interviews with opposition MPs, including Hone Harawira, who used the word “bullshit”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the good taste and decency and children’s interests standards: the comment would not have surprised or distressed most viewers in the context of a political story screened during an unclassified news programme targeted at adults.

Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Children’s Interests

During live talkback on the election “tea tapes” story, Radio Live host Michael Laws commented that “the media have gone mad, rabid. If I had a gun I’d shoot them, put them out of their misery, because they have gone rabid and they may infect others.” He went on to specifically mention the Herald on Sunday and questioned why someone hadn’t taken a shotgun and “cleaned out the entire news room”. A majority of the Authority upheld the complaint that these comments breached the good taste and decency standard: the combination of the length of the statement, its repeated use of graphic imagery, its specificity in relation to identified journalists and its mode of delivery made the statement unacceptable. Notwithstanding the importance of freedom of expression, Mr Laws’ comments went too far. The Authority made no order. In a minority decision, one member argued that the broadcast did not breach the good taste and decency standard because of the context of talkback radio and Mr Laws’ style, and the use of an accepted and well understood colloquialism. The Authority unanimously did not uphold the complaint that the words breached the law and order standard.

Upheld (Majority): Good Taste and Decency
Not Upheld: Law and Order

No Order

An episode of Embarrassing Bodies, a reality television series about the treatment of embarrassing medical conditions, was broadcast on TV2 at 8.30pm and included close-up shots of women’s vaginas and of surgical operations being performed on them. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the programme breached standards relating to good taste and decency, responsible programming and children’s interests: the programme had educational value and the nudity was non-sexual and matter-of-fact; the programme was correctly classified AO and preceded by an adequate warning for nudity and medical scenes; and the clear warning and signposting of likely content gave parents an opportunity to exercise discretion.

Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Responsible Programming, Children’s Interests

An item on Te Karere reported that Whakatane Hospital’s Microbiology Department would be closing, with all microbiology services moving to Tauranga. The Authority upheld the complaint that the item was inaccurate and misleading in creating this impression since urgent services would continue to be provided on-site. The broadcaster had not made reasonable efforts to ensure the item’s accuracy. The Authority made no order.

Upheld: Accuracy

No Order