During Afternoons with Jim Mora on Radio New Zealand National, the host and panellists discussed a coroner’s recommendation, with one panellist criticising the recommendation and stating, “for god’s sake, somebody drown that coroner”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached standards relating to good taste and decency, law and order, accuracy, fairness, and discrimination and denigration: the panellist’s comment was flippant and not intended to be taken literally or as a serious encouragement to commit unlawful acts; and it was aimed at the coroner in his professional capacity, rather than being personally abusive.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Law and Order, Accuracy, Fairness, Discrimination and Denigration
In a One News item broadcast on Waitangi Day, the presenter referred to the Treaty of Waitangi as “the nation’s founding document”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this was inaccurate: the reporter’s description was not a material point of fact to which the standard applied and the description would not have misled viewers in the context of the item.
Not Upheld: Accuracy
During D’Arcy Waldegrave Drive on Radio Sport, the host and producer referred to rugby players as “Jesus” and “God”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached standards relating to good taste and decency, discrimination and denigration, and responsible programming: the use of these terms to compliment rugby players would not have offended or distressed most listeners in context, and the comments did not carry any invective or encourage the denigration of, or discrimination against, Christians as a section of the community.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Discrimination and Denigration, Responsible Programming
A 3 News item reported on the findings of an investigation into the actions of New Zealand’s intelligence agency, the Government Communications Security Bureau, and the Government’s proposed response to those findings. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that two statements about the governing legislation were inaccurate: the item focused on the key finding that the legislation was ambiguous, and the statements were not inaccurate or misleading when taken in this context.
Not Upheld: Accuracy
A 3 News bulletin reported on the granting of parole to a man jailed in relation to the so-called “Urewera anti-terror raids”. The newsreader said men were “jailed over military-style training camps” and the item showed a photograph of Tame Iti wearing a balaclava-type headpiece and holding a gun. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the report breached the accuracy, controversial issues and fairness standards: while the newsreader’s statement was technically inaccurate, the position was immediately clarified when the newsreader said the men were sentenced for firearms offences; and the photograph of Tame Iti was relevant to the subject matter. The newsreader’s introductory comment and the photograph did not create an unfair impression that the men were terrorists; and the item did not contain a discussion of a controversial issue of public importance requiring the presentation of alternative viewpoints.
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues, Accuracy, Fairness
An item on Sunday profiled a New Zealand businessman and his experience in a Chinese prison, including his claims about forced prison labour and the exportation of prison products to the West. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the item breached standards relating to good taste and decency, law and order, controversial issues, accuracy, fairness, discrimination and denigration, and responsible programming: the item focused on the experience of one man and did not discuss a controversial issue of public importance; the information the complainant was concerned about was conveyed as the interviewee’s personal opinion and interpretation of events; no individual or organisation was treated unfairly; and the story did not encourage the denigration of China or Chinese people.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Law and Order, Controversial Issues, Accuracy, Fairness, Discrimination and Denigration, Responsible Programming
An episode of High Country Rescue, a reality series which followed police and search and rescue volunteers, profiled the attempted rescue of a tramper who died. The episode made various references to the man’s “tramping party” and the “friends of the injured man” and showed brief footage of some of them with their faces blurred. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the privacy and fairness standards: the complainant did not “take part” in the programme and was not sufficiently “referred to” for the purposes of the fairness standard; the complainant was not identifiable and no private facts were disclosed; and no footage of the complainant was broadcast. In any case, the programme producers and the broadcaster showed due sensitivity and discretion.
Not Upheld: Privacy, Fairness
Five items reporting on an episode of escalating violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the Gaza Strip were broadcast on Radio New Zealand National. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that they breached the balance standard because they were biased towards the Palestinian position. The broadcaster had clearly made reasonable efforts to present significant viewpoints, including the Israeli perspective, across more than 250 news bulletins and programmes within the period of current interest.
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues
During Overnight Talkback with Bruce Russell, the host and a caller discussed a meteorite exploding over central Russia and causing a shock that injured many people. The host made comments to the effect he would rather it happened in Russia than in New Zealand. The Authority did not uphold the good taste and decency complaint, as the host’s comments were expressed in a light-hearted and flippant manner and would not have offended or distressed most listeners in context.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency
An AO comedy programme, A Night at the Classic, contained extensive coarse language and sexual references. Given the late time of broadcast (10pm), the specific pre-broadcast warning and the AO classification, the Authority concluded that the programme did not breach standards of good taste and decency and responsible programming.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Responsible Programming