An episode of Shameless, a comedy-drama series centred on British underclass and working class culture, broadcast on UKTV at 11.45am, contained sex scenes, swearing and violence. The broadcaster had upheld the complaint under the content classification, warning and filtering standard, and the Authority considered the action taken under that standard sufficient. However, the Authority upheld the complaint that the episode also breached the good taste and decency standard: the incorrect classification and inadequate warning label meant that viewers were not sufficiently informed of the programme’s likely content and were therefore denied the opportunity to make a different viewing choice and were more likely to be offended. The Authority did not find a breach of the children’s interests standard: the broadcaster sufficiently protected child viewers from unsuitable content by classifying the programme as 16. The Authority made no order.
Upheld: Good Taste and Decency
Not Upheld (Action Taken): Content Classification, Warning and Filtering
Not Upheld: Children’s Interests
No Order
Keep Calm and Carry On, a reality series on TV One about the host’s experience of new motherhood, contained a brief mention of ‘The Unfortunate Experiment’ – an experiment at New Zealand’s National Women's Hospital from 1966 onwards that was investigated by the Cartwright Inquiry of 1987–88. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the reference breached the controversial issues, accuracy and fairness standards: the programme did not contain a “discussion” of the issue so was not required to present alternative viewpoints, the reference was brief and not material to the focus of the programme, and the complainant did not specify who she considered had been treated unfairly.
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues, Accuracy, Fairness
A One News item reported on a “skimming” scheme in which the accused allegedly “fleeced money from customers who used eftpos machines inside at least one Auckland business”. The item referred to and showed footage of the Brooklyn Bar in Auckland where, according to one customer, he had had his card “skimmed”. The Authority upheld the complaint that this breached the accuracy and fairness standards: the item wrongly singled out and identified the Brooklyn Bar as having been targeted by the fraud, which created the impression the business was unsafe; the complainant was not provided with a fair and reasonable opportunity to comment and correct the information; and the broadcaster failed to make proper inquiries. The Authority made no order.
Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness
No Order
A segment on 3 News: Firstline included an interview with a spokesperson from the Sensible Sentencing Trust regarding a proposed amendment to the Parole Act 2002. The spokesperson expressed her view that the amendment “did not go far enough” and that parole hearings should be abolished altogether. The Authority upheld the complaint that this breached the controversial issues standard: the item discussed a controversial issue of public importance, and while the presenter alluded to the existence of other points of view, this did not go far enough – the broadcaster accepted that it had not made reasonable efforts, or given reasonable opportunities, to present alternative viewpoints. The Authority did not find a breach of the accuracy and fairness standards: the statements amounted to comment and opinion and were therefore exempt from standards of accuracy, the item was not misleading, and parole board members, prisoners, and victims of crime were all treated fairly. The Authority made no order.
Upheld: Controversial Issues
Not Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness
No Order
An episode of What’s Really In Our Food?, a weekly television series investigating different food groups, and exploring the potential health benefits and/or risks associated with those foods, contained a fun human experiment to test the effects of Omega 3 on the attention span of young boys. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the accuracy standard: the experiment was clearly intended to be light-hearted and entertaining and did not purport to be scientifically rigorous or reliable, the conclusions drawn from the experiment were vague, and viewers would not have been misled.
Not Upheld: Accuracy
An item on Spectrum on Radio New Zealand National reported on The Nelson Ark APART programme, an eight-week dog training course designed to teach young people discipline, compassion and tolerance through empathy. A young female graduate was asked about her background and how she came to be on the programme. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the item had breached her privacy: the woman was not identifiable; she did not say she was raped, as the complainant alleged; and no private facts were disclosed in a manner that would be considered highly offensive, as the woman was a willing participant.
Not Upheld: Privacy
An item on Checkpoint reported that an Anglican Minister had been suspended for removing children from a youth camp to protect them from a man he believed was a sexual predator. The Authority upheld the complaint that the church and the Bishop had been treated unfairly: the broadcaster did not have a sufficient foundation for broadcasting such serious allegations and did not provide any corroborating evidence, and though the church was provided with a fair opportunity to comment, the item failed to adequately present their response. The Authority did not agree that the item breached the controversial issues and accuracy standards: it did not discuss a controversial issue of public importance and the Authority was not in a position to determine whether the impression of the alleged offending was misleading. The Authority made no order.
Upheld: Fairness
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues, Accuracy
No Order
Two items on Fair Go investigated claims about a wooden gate manufacturer. Customers were interviewed about their experiences with the company and its director, and the item contained footage, filmed from a public footpath, of the company director at his workshop. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the item breached standards relating to privacy, law and order, controversial issues, fairness, accuracy, discrimination and denigration, and responsible programming: no private facts were disclosed about the director, and footage taken on his property was not broadcast; the impression created about him and his company was based on the opinions of customers, which were exempt from standards of accuracy; the director was provided with a fair and adequate opportunity to respond and the item included comprehensive summaries of his statement; and the broadcast was accurate in all material respects and would not have misled viewers on the essential issues.
Not Upheld: Good taste and Decency, Law and Order, Privacy, Controversial Issues, Accuracy, Fairness, Discrimination and Denigration, Responsible Programming
An item on Te Kāea, broadcast on Māori Television, reported on an Anglican deacon who was allegedly stood down after making a complaint about a man he alleged had been the subject of a sexual abuse inquiry. The Authority upheld the complaint that this breached the accuracy and fairness standards: it is not the Authority's role to determine the nature of the the alleged sexual abuse and its portrayal in the item; the item omitted other reasons for the deacon's suspension, which was misleading; the item was unfair to the church and the Bishop because the broadcaster did not have a sufficient foundation for broadcasting serious allegations and did not appear to take any steps to corroborate the essential facts of the broadcast; and given the seriousness of the allegations, the church was not provided with a fair and reasonable opportunity to comment. The Authority did not agree that the item breached the controversial issues standard as it did not discuss a controversial issue of public importance.
The Authority made no order.
Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues
No Order
A One News item allegedly contained comments that were inconsistent with a BBC report that quoted the United States Attorney General as saying New Zealand had opened its ports to US war ships. The Authority declined to determine the complaint that the comments breached the accuracy standard: the broadcaster was unable to identify a relevant broadcast which corresponded directly with the time and date specified in the referral, and in any case the complainant's concerns were matters of personal preference and editorial discretion.
Declined to Determine: Accuracy