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
All Decisions
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 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
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
An item on Seven Sharp reporting on violence against women contained instrumental excerpts from the song "Smack My Bitch Up" playing in the background. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the good taste and decency standard: only viewers who knew the song would have recognised it from the instrumental excerpts; and the use of these excerpts did not undermine the important message of the segment but drew attention to, and raised awareness of, the issue.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency
An item on Breakfast, entitled “Daycare vs Homecare”, included an interview with the President of the Home Education Learning Organisation about the benefits of home-based childcare education as opposed to daycare. It contained comments by the President that reflected negatively on daycare. The Authority upheld the complaint that the item was unbalanced: it discussed a controversial issue of public importance and the interview was framed as a debate about the merits of daycare versus homecare, but the item itself had the flavour of an advertorial, and taking into account the likely audience, insufficient balance was provided and the broadcaster did not make reasonable efforts to present significant viewpoints.
The Authority made no order.
Upheld: Controversial Issues
No Order
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
During Michael Laws Talkback the host expressed the view that medical personnel were deliberately
overmedicating patients with dementia, causing them to die. He used the term “zombie” when referring to a person with dementia. The complainant called the station to challenge the host’s comments but was cut off. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached standards relating to accuracy, fairness, and discrimination and denigration: broadcasters have the right to screen calls, as a matter of editorial discretion; the host did not make any derogatory or abusive comments but simply chose not to engage with the complainant; and the use of the term “zombie” was not vitriolic or an attack against people with dementia – the host was expressing his opinion and comments were typical of his style.
Not Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness, Discrimination and Denigration
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
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