An item on Seven Sharp reported on a Labour MP throwing a "Lazarus party" to mark his return to the front bench. The presenter commented, "Leaving aside anything about resurrections and dodgy movies in hotels, Shane Jones is actually known for referring to himself in the third person". The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the presenter's comments breached the good taste and decency, and discrimination and denigration standards: the presenter did not make any reference to the Resurrection of Christ and nothing in the broadcast would have offended or distressed viewers, or encouraged discrimination or denigration against Christians as a section of the community.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Discrimination and Denigration
During the Jay-Jay, Mike & Dom Show, the hosts discussed a controversial tweet Dom had posted about The X Factor NZ. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached standards relating to responsible programming and discrimination and denigration: the broadcast sparked debate about the acceptability of the tweet and whether it was sexist, and contained views both for and against the tweet and the criticism it attracted; and the hosts' comment did not encourage discrimination or denigration against any sections of the community.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Controversial Issues, Accuracy, Fairness, Discrimination and Denigration, Responsible Programming
When talking about an interview with a Kiwi actor on Seven Sharp, one presenter commented, "I was about as popular as a wet fart in a wedding dress". The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the good taste and decency standard: the comment was a brief, throwaway remark used to convey the meaning that the presenter was unpopular.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency
An item on 60 Minutes, "The Two Dads Story", reported on a same-sex couple and their experience of parenthood through the use of an off-shore surrogate. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the controversial issues standard: the item did not amount to a discussion of a controversial issue of public importance as it focused on the couple's personal story, and so it did not require the presentation of alternative viewpoints.
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues
A political commentator on Nine to Noon made comments about the background to negotiations between the Government and Rio Tinto over the Tiwai Point smelter. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the comments were inaccurate: they amounted to the panellist's opinion, not statements of fact, and were high value speech.
Not Upheld: Accuracy
In an interview with a successful New Zealand businessman on Sunday Morning with Chris Laidlaw, the businessman made a very brief reference to a trustee of one of his projects. The Authority declined to determine the complaint that this breached the accuracy, fairness and responsible programming standards: the complaint was trivial and it was bordering on vexatious for the complainant to continue referring similar complaints following the Authority's previous rulings.
Declined to Determine: Accuracy, Fairness, Responsible Programming
Reports on TV One's Breakfast programme discussed the identity of a deceased teenager, even though in a live telephone interview during the programme it was noted that the police were not releasing the deceased's name, as requested by his family. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the disclosure breached the family's privacy: though the deceased's family were identified through their connection with him, no private facts were revealed because the deceased's identity had already been disclosed on social media sites and so was in the public realm, even if not officially confirmed by police. The broadcaster also took steps, as soon as reasonably practicable, to ensure that the deceased was not named again in the programme.
Not Upheld: Privacy
In the first episode of Harry, a fictional crime drama series set in South Auckland, a detective investigated a spate of robberies. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the programme breached standards relating to discrimination and denigration, law and order, good taste and decency, violence, and accuracy. The programme did not encourage the denigration of, or discrimination against, South Pacific people as a section of the community; the depiction of criminal activity in a fictional drama did not encourage viewers to break the law or otherwise promote or condone criminal activity; the sexual content was brief and inexplicit and preceded by a warning for sexual material; the content complained about did not constitute violence, and in any event, the broadcaster exercised sufficient care and discretion by classifying the programme AO, screening it at 9.30pm, and using a specific pre-broadcast warning; and the accuracy standard does not apply to fictional programmes.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Law and Order, Accuracy, Discrimination and Denigration, Violence
In a promo for Seven Sharp, the presenter referred to the ongoing Novopay debacle and said, "how many of us still give a toss?" The Authority declined to determine the complaint that this breached the good taste and decency standard on the basis that it was frivolous.
Declined to Determine: Good Taste and Decency
Country Calendar showed footage of a young woman setting a leg-hold trap and moving behind a tree to kill a possum. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the good taste and decency standard: the footage was extremely brief and did not show anything graphic or gruesome as the possum was killed off-screen, and it was acceptable in the context of the programme.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency