An episode of Last Chance Dogs, a reality television series about dogs with behavioural problems and their owners, was broadcast on TV2. It followed three dogs which were taken from their owner by animal control officers because they were not registered and had been aggressive towards other dogs. At the end of the episode a teaser was shown for the next episode, in which the programme’s resident dog trainer was attempting to train one of the three dogs and the dog was shown attacking two dogs in a park. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the programme breached the law and order, controversial issues and responsible programming standards: the programme did not encourage viewers to break the law or otherwise promote, condone or glamorise criminal activity and the focus was on dogs being removed from their owner because they were not registered; the programme did not discuss a controversial issue of public importance; and the responsible programming standard was not applicable.
Not Upheld: Law and Order, Controversial Issues, Responsible Programming
During Michael Laws Talkback, broadcast on Radio Live, the host interviewed the complainant, a spokesperson for the American Pit Bull Terrier Association. The host accused her of misquoting statistics and making untrue statements; he made comments such as “you’re just as bad as your dogs” and, “can you wear a muzzle”. The Authority held that this was a serious breach of the fairness standard and the action taken by the broadcaster, in upholding only part of the fairness complaint, was insufficient. The Authority did not uphold the accuracy complaint since the host did not make unqualified statements of fact.
The Authority ordered the broadcast of a statement, including an apology to the complainant.
Upheld: Fairness and Action Taken
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Accuracy, Discrimination and Denigration, Responsible Programming
Order: Broadcast of statement, including apology to complainant
An item on 3 News, broadcast on TV3 at 6pm, reported on a “strip club turf war” in Wellington and contained footage of a stripper wearing only a G-string and dancing erotically. The broadcaster upheld the initial complaint that this breached the good taste and decency and children’s interests standards, apologising to the complainant and counselling its editorial staff to prevent a similar breach. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the action taken by the broadcaster was insufficient.
Not Upheld (Action Taken): Good Taste and Decency, Children’s Interests
A 3 News item on the Conservative Party leader and apparent party practices commented on the party’s “distinctly Christian streak”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the item breached the discrimination and denigration standard: the item was a legitimate and straightforward news report which did not encourage the denigration of, or discrimination against, any section of the community.
Not Upheld: Discrimination and Denigration
An item on One News reported on court proceedings in which the complainant was found guilty on charges under the Animal Welfare Act 1999. The item contained footage of an SPCA raid at the complainant’s property and archive photographs of cats and dogs there. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the item breached the accuracy, fairness and privacy standards: the reporter’s summary of the court judgment captured the essence of a complex decision; the archive photographs and footage were used as visual wallpaper and would not have misled viewers; the complainant was provided with an adequate opportunity to comment; and though he was identifiable the photographs were legitimately obtained by SPCA, and the use of archive footage was justified, given the ongoing focus on the complainant’s breeding activities.
Not Upheld: Privacy, Accuracy, Fairness
At approximately 9.11pm during Kerre Woodham Talkback, the host said, “You fricken moron”, in response to a caller’s comment that having a disability was the result of “inbreeding”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the host’s comment breached the good taste and decency and responsible programming standards: the comment was broadcast after 9pm during a talkback programme targeted at adults, it would not have surprised or offended most listeners, and its broadcast in this context was not socially irresponsible.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Responsible Programming
During the ZM drive show Jay, Flynny and Jacqui, one of the hosts told a personal anecdote about a prank she committed in her youth, namely setting off a fire alarm, “resulting in all of Timaru’s fire engines turning up”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the host’s comments breached the law and order standard: the anecdote was a light-hearted recollection of the host’s actions in her youth intended to entertain, but with an educational message – the host made comments condemning her own behaviour and noting the repercussions – and the story did not invite imitation or otherwise encourage listeners to break the law.
Not Upheld: Law and Order
In an interview on Radio New Zealand National’s Checkpoint the Executive Director of the Rape Prevention Education Group stated, “I think our focus has to be on the safety of our children, and we know that approximately one in four girls and one in eight boys are likely to experience some form of sexual violence before the age of 16”. RNZ News later reported, “The group’s executive director, Kim McGregor, claims . . .” and repeated the figures. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the statement breached the accuracy standard: the Director’s comment was not a statement of fact but reflected her views and experiences, and was presented from an advocacy perspective, the figures were approximates and, while contentious, were supported by some independent research.
Not Upheld: Accuracy
The question for the Authority was whether a complaint had been submitted within the time allowed. The complainant submitted two formal complaints about two broadcasts on Fair Go, using the broadcaster’s online complaint form. The broadcaster declined to accept the second complaint on the basis that it was out of time. Under the Broadcasting Act 1989 formal complaints must be lodged in writing with the broadcaster within 20 working days after the programme has screened. The complainant submitted his online complaint shortly before midnight on 28 June, the 20th working day after the broadcast. The definition of “working day” in section 2 of the Act specifies days of the year that are to be excluded but not times of day. The Authority held that the ordinary meaning of a “day” runs from midnight to midnight and that the complaint should have been accepted by the broadcaster. The Authority made an order directing the complaint back to the broadcaster to be accepted and considered as a formal complaint.
Order: Broadcaster to accept and consider complaint as a formal complaint
A promo for Two and a Half Men screened at 2.10pm during Anderson, a chat show rated G (General), as part of a montage of promos for ‘Comedy Wednesday’; it contained sexual innuendo and the word “penis”. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the promo breached standards relating to good taste and decency, responsible programming, and children’s interests: the promo screened during a chat show targeted at adults and in an AO timeslot; the promo was light-hearted and intended to be humorous; the sexual content was sufficiently inexplicit, and the broadcaster adequately considered children’s interests.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Responsible Programming, Children’s Interests