Two episodes of Piha Rescue, a reality TV series following the work of lifeguards at Piha Beach, showed rescues involving unidentified surf schools at Piha. In the second episode there was a confrontation between a surfing instructor, who had his face pixellated, and members of the Piha Surf Lifesaving Club when the lifeguards attempted to rescue students and the instructor resisted. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the episodes breached the fairness and accuracy standards: no surf school was named in the 12 March episode and the narrator referred to surf schools in a general way only, and the Piha community and surf coaching industry are not “organisations” for the purposes of the fairness standard. The 19 March episode captured events as they played out and the footage was not unfairly edited – viewers were left to make up their own minds about the incident, the complainant was not identifiable and his perspective was clear from his comments in the item and from the narrator’s statement at the end of the segment, and the police presence was not emphasised. The statements subject to complaint amounted to the opinion and comment of the lifeguards and patrol captains on duty, as presented by the narrator, and were not statements of fact so were exempt from standards of accuracy.
Not Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness
During the Jay-Jay, Mike and Dom Show on The Edge, the hosts discussed charges being faced by radio broadcaster Iain Stables, following an altercation with his ex-girlfriend’s parents. They commented that he was guilty and discussed his bipolar condition. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached his privacy: Iain Stables was identifiable but the programme did not reveal any private facts about him because information about the charges he faced, his previous altercations, and the fact that he had bipolar disorder, was already in the public domain.
Not Upheld: Privacy
A One News item reported on a recent study by the University of Otago into the effects of 1080 poison on native robins. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached standards relating to controversial issues, accuracy, fairness and responsible programming. The use of 1080 as a method for pest control in New Zealand is a controversial issue of public importance which has been the subject of ongoing debate, and the item contributed a new development in the debate; viewers could reasonably be expected to be aware of arguments on both sides of the debate, and the programme presented significant viewpoints to an extent that was appropriate given the nature of the issue. The allegedly inaccurate statements were not material to the focus of the item and would not have materially altered viewers’ understanding of the broadcast, and the broadcaster made reasonable efforts to ensure that the item was accurate and did not mislead by interviewing the Professor who conducted the study.
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues, Accuracy, Fairness, Responsible Programming
Two items on Checkpoint, broadcast on Radio New Zealand National, discussed the results of a recent “clamp down” on drug-taking truck drivers in New Zealand and Australia. The items included interviews with the CEO of the Australia New Zealand Policing Advisory Agency and with a representative of First Union, the union for road transport workers. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the items breached the controversial issues standard: consideration of whether drug-taking by truck drivers is a widespread problem in New Zealand, and the implications for road safety, did not amount to a discussion of a controversial issue of public importance – at this stage it is not an issue that has been widely discussed or debated publicly – but the broadcaster nevertheless provided some balance in the items.
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues
During the final episode of MasterChef New Zealand, broadcast at 7.30pm on TV One, the contestants used the words “crapping” and “pissed off”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the good taste and decency standard: the language used was low-level and would not have offended most viewers in the context of a PGR programme.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency
A Close Up item reported on the sentencing of a man convicted of shooting another man in a hunting accident. During a visual reconstruction of a hunting trip, a gun was shown pointing towards the camera; the image was brief and out-of-focus and was on screen for approximately two seconds. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the law and order standard: footage of a gun pointed at the camera, while confronting, did not, when taken in context, encourage viewers to break the law or otherwise promote, condone or glamorise criminal activity.
Not Upheld: Law and Order
A news item on Checkpoint allegedly contained certain comments from Radio New Zealand’s economics reporter. The Authority declined to determine the complaint that these comments breached the accuracy, fairness and responsible programming standards: the comments identified by the complainant did not match the broadcast time and date specified and the Authority was therefore unable to assess broadcasting standards against those comments.
Declined to Determine: Accuracy, Fairness, Responsible Programming
A One News item reported on the verdict of not guilty in the Ewen McDonald murder trial. At the end of the item the reporter commented, “You could well be thinking, if he’s not guilty, why hasn’t he walked out these doors behind me and spoken to media? The reason for that of course is that he’s admitted causing vandalism, graffiti and arson…” The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the law and order, and fairness standards: the item was a legitimate news story with a high level of public interest, and as the accused in a high-profile murder case Mr McDonald could expect to be the subject of media scrutiny; and the reporter’s question did not encourage viewers to break the law or otherwise promote or condone criminal activity.
Not Upheld: Law and Order, Fairness
When the hosts of the Willie and JT Show were discussing an industrial dispute at the Ports of Auckland, one host expressed his support for the striking workers by saying, for example, “I hope they get aggressive down there at the wharf”, “Go and bust your pickets over some of these scabs”, and, “I am into militant action.” The Authority did not uphold the complaint that these comments breached the law and order and responsible programming standards: the comments amounted to the host’s vehemently expressed opinion and listeners would not have taken them seriously; the broadcast did not encourage listeners to engage in unlawful activity, taking into account the host’s later retractions and other contextual factors; and upholding a complaint about high value protest speech like this would unjustifiably restrict freedom of expression. The complaint about responsible programming was subsumed into consideration of law and order.
Not Upheld: Law and Order, Responsible Programming
An item on One News included the results of a Colmar Brunton poll on the percentage of party votes for major political parties. The results allegedly did not take account of “undecided voters”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the accuracy standard: the omission of undecided voters was not material given the focus and context of the item which was the decline in the level of support for the National Party, so viewers would not have been misled in any significant respect, and the potential harm in terms of impact on voter participation was not significant given the length of time until the next general election.
Not Upheld: Accuracy