BSA Decisions Ngā whakatau a Te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

The Authority¹ has not upheld two complaints under the balance, accuracy, and fairness standards about a Saturday Morning interview with the Head of Programs for Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) discussing humanitarian crises in Lebanon and Gaza. The Authority found no breach of the balance standard because: the broadcast was focussed on the humanitarian effects of the conflicts; it was clearly signalled as being from MSF’s perspective; the audience also could reasonably be expected to be aware of significant context and viewpoints (on the relevant issue and conflicts more generally) from other media coverage; and the broadcast was not required to present allegations surrounding MSF’s neutrality. Regarding accuracy, the Authority found the likelihood of a listener being misled by omission of any of the identified perspectives and context was significantly reduced, noting the broadcast’s narrow focus and other media coverage of the conflict. The fairness standard did not apply.

Not Upheld: Balance, Accuracy, Fairness

The Authority has declined to determine a complaint, under the offensive and disturbing content standard, about a PG-rated Hyundai Country Calendar episode where a farmer said ‘shit’ twice. In light of the Authority’s guidance on complaints that are unlikely to succeed and previous decisions on low-level offensive language, the Authority considered it appropriate to decline to determine the complaint.

Declined to determine (section 11(b) of the Broadcasting Act 1989 – in all the circumstances): Offensive and Disturbing Content

The Authority has not upheld a complaint that a 1News report about the breakdown of peace negotiations between Iran and the United States breached the balance and accuracy standards. The complaint alleged the broadcast’s reference to Israel’s attacks on Lebanon did not contextualise Israel’s actions, thereby omitting Israel’s perspective and giving the misleading impression its attacks were gratuitous. The Authority did not uphold the balance complaint, noting the broadcast was not a discussion of the Hezbollah and Israel conflict – which was mentioned in passing. Viewers would not have expected to receive further context on that conflict in such a report. The omitted contextual information also did not render the item materially misleading.

Not Upheld: Balance, Accuracy

The Authority has not upheld a complaint that a brief 1News update on the ongoing conflict between Iran and the United States breached the balance standard. The Authority has consistently recognised the brevity of such broadcasts, providing updates on recent events, means they typically do not constitute a ‘discussion’ of issues for the purposes of the balance standard. Even if the balance standard did apply, it would not have been breached as the audience could reasonably be expected to be aware of significant viewpoints from other reporting, and the item did not purport to be an in-depth analysis of the conflict or the issues raised by the complainant.

Not Upheld: Balance

The Authority has declined to determine a complaint about a 1News broadcast reporting the Government’s announced plan to ‘axe’ the Broadcasting Standards Authority | Te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho (BSA). The complainant said it was inaccurate to say the BSA had been ‘axed’ as it has not, and may never, happen. Noting the nature of the broadcast and conflict presented by determining issues associated with itself, the Authority considered that, in all circumstances of the complaint, it should not be determined.

Declined to determine (section 11(b) of the Broadcasting Act 1989 – in all the circumstances): Accuracy

The Authority has declined to determine a complaint a promo on RNZ National for coverage of the 2026 ANZAC Day national commemoration, breached broadcasting standards. The complainant considered the statement ‘ANZAC commemorations bring together all Kiwis, as we stand as one to honour our service personnel,’ was inaccurate and unbalanced, as there are many New Zealanders who do not support or commemorate ANZAC Day for a range of reasons. The Authority considered the complaint was trivial and did not warrant determination, noting the arguments raised did not identify any potential harm at a level requiring intervention.

Declined to determine (section 11(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989 – trivial): Balance, Accuracy

The Authority has not upheld a complaint a segment of Mai Home Run, discussing Japan’s population crisis, breached the discrimination and denigration standard. The hosts commented on how Japan could ‘get tips from India’ as the world’s most populous country. The complainant considered the segment denigrated Indian people. Within the context of the broadcast, the Authority found the comments were unlikely to encourage the different treatment, or devalue the reputation, of Indian people.

Not Upheld: Discrimination and Denigration 

The Authority has not upheld a complaint that ‘inappropriate and potentially racist’ comments made in reference to white people during a Mai Morning Crew broadcast breached the offensive and disturbing content, and discrimination and denigration standards. The comments, while potentially offensive to some, did not reach the high threshold required to constitute a breach of the discrimination and denigration standard. The broadcast did not encourage the different treatment of white people nor devalue their reputation. While the Authority considered the complaint was best dealt with under the discrimination and denigration standard rather than the offensive and disturbing content standard, it noted the broadcast was unlikely to seriously violate community norms or disproportionately disturb or offend the audience in the context.

Not Upheld: Offensive and Disturbing Content, Discrimination and Denigration

The Authority has not upheld a complaint an item on Morning Report about the just-released annual Greenhouse Gas Inventory, and the opportunity presented by the fuel crisis to reduce New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions, was inaccurate and unbalanced. The Authority found the broadcaster made reasonable efforts to ensure the accuracy of the broadcast, by relying on reputable experts in the field of climate science, and the findings of the Greenhouse Gas Inventory as an official and recognised report. It found the balance standard was not breached, noting the introduction made it clear the item was focused on the perspectives of climate scientists interviewed. In this context, the audience would not have expected alternative viewpoints to be presented or been left otherwise misinformed.

Not Upheld: Balance, Accuracy

Following its interlocutory decision finding it has jurisdiction under the Broadcasting Act 1989 to consider a complaint about The Platform’s Live Talkback,¹ the Broadcasting Standards Authority has determined two complaints about online broadcasts by The Platform on 22 July 2025 and 15 October 2025 – both of which have been upheld.

22 July 2025 broadcast: Upheld – s 4(1)(a) good taste and decency

15 October 2025 broadcast: Upheld – s 4(1)(b) law and order; s 4(1)(c) privacy 

No Order