Skip to main content

Today we released decisions on nine complaints, none of which were upheld by the Authority.

Eight of the complaints related to free-to-air television broadcasts and one complaint related to a radio broadcast.

Two of the television broadcasts complained about were separate Seven Sharp items on the New Zealand flag referendum. The complainants alleged that these items were unbalanced. The Authority did not uphold the complaints and found that alternative views on the flag debate received considerable media coverage over a significant period of time and generated robust and widespread discussion among New Zealanders. In light of this the Authority found that it was reasonable to expect viewers were aware of the different points of view on the flag issue by the time of these two broadcasts.

You can read our media release on these two decisions here or by clicking on the Media Releases button below. 

You can read more about these decisions by clicking on the link below. 

Today we released nine new decisions. The Authority upheld one complaint, declined to determine one complaint and did not uphold seven complaints.  

Mitchell and Te Reo Irirangi O Te Arawa

The upheld decision is about a programme broadcast on Te Arawa FM, which formed part of a regular segment paid for by the Pukeroa Oruawhata Trust. The programme featured an interview with the Trust’s deputy chairman, who discussed issues around the Ngāti Whakaue Treaty settlement and the general governance of Ngāti Whakaue. The Authority upheld the complaint from the former chairman of Ngāti Whakaue Tribal Lands Incorporation that the programme was unbalanced and unfair to him.

The Authority emphasised that programmes paid for by a third party are still subject to broadcasting standards. It found the programme did not present any alternative views to those of the Trust on controversial and important issues and the complainant was not given an opportunity to respond to the interviewee’s criticism of him.

Seqirus (NZ) Ltd and MediaWorks TV Ltd

One of the not upheld decisions related to a 3D investigation into the cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil. The programme featured the stories of several girls who believed they had suffered serious health problems after receiving the vaccination. The Authority did not uphold a complaint from the maker of Gardasil, Seqirus (NZ) Ltd, that the item misleadingly gave the impression that Gardasil was unsafe and alarmed and deceived the public when there was no evidential basis for doing so.

The Authority found the programme carried high public interest and presented the concerns about Gardasil in a responsible and balanced way, which included addressing medical evidence which disputed that Gardasil was unsafe.

You can read our media releases on these two decisions here or by clicking on the Media Releases button below. 

You can read more about these decisions by clicking on the link below.

Today we released nine new decisions, one of which was upheld. The upheld decision is about an item on TVNZ’s ONE News which introduced a report on incidents of violence in East Jerusalem and other areas of Palestine and Israel by referring to ‘Israel’. The Authority agreed with the complainant that the item was inaccurate because East Jerusalem is internationally recognised as being part of Palestine, not Israel, and viewers would have been misled into thinking that much of the violence took place in Israel.

Seven of the decisions relate to broadcasts on free-to-air television, one relates to a pay television broadcast and one relates to a radio broadcast. The most commonly complained about standards were fairness and accuracy.  

You can read more about these decisions by clicking on the link below.

Today we released two new decisions, one of which was upheld. The upheld decision is about an item broadcast on the opening night of TV3’s Story which suggested that an Auckland real estate agent was potentially in breach of the industry code of conduct. The Authority found that this was unfair to the real estate agent because her position was not fairly presented and the item used hidden camera footage of her that was not justified in the public interest. As a remedy, the Authority ordered MediaWorks, the broadcaster responsible for TV3, to publish a statement online that notes that the Story item breached the fairness standard and to reimburse Ms Wildman for a portion of her legal costs. 

You can read our media release on this decision here or by clicking on the Media Releases button below. 
 
The other decision concerns a promo for Paul Henry in which the host joked about the type of dialogue that might occur between members of a terrorist group, which the Authority found did not breach broadcasting standards.

We released seven new decisions today, none of which the Authority upheld. Four of the decisions relate to programmes broadcast on free-to-air television, and three relate to programmes broadcast on radio. The standards most commonly complained about were accuracy, controversial issues and discrimination and denigration.

Two of the decisions relate to a Story presenter's mail-order purchase of a firearm. You can read more about these decisions by clicking on the link below.