A TV One documentary entitled A Rotten Shame investigated New Zealand’s leaky homes crisis and sought to expose systematic failures in the building industry that had led to the crisis. The presenter door-stepped a building inspector responsible for inspecting a house eleven years earlier, which had since developed serious problems and had to be demolished. A portion of this interview was included in the programme. The building inspector complained that this breached the controversial issues, accuracy and fairness standards. The Authority held that the action taken by the broadcaster in upholding the door-stepping aspect of the fairness complaint was insufficient. The Authority did not uphold any other part of the complaint: the item focused on systematic failures which led to the leaky homes crisis rather than on the complainant, it included the complainant’s viewpoint, and it did not create a misleading impression about the complainant’s culpability. The Authority ordered TVNZ to pay $500 towards the complainant’s legal costs.
Upheld: Fairness (Action Taken)
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues, Accuracy, Fairness
Order: $500 costs to complainant
An item on Campbell Live, broadcast on TV3 at 7pm, reported on bullying and fighting at Massey High School and showed repeated footage of girls fighting. It was not preceded by a warning. The Authority did not uphold complaints that the item breached standards relating to privacy, accuracy, fairness, responsible programming, children’s interests, and violence. The students shown in the footage were not identifiable to anyone beyond those who already knew about the fighting; the impression created about fighting and bullying at Massey stemmed from the facts of the incident and the response of students and parents; Massey was provided with a reasonable opportunity to comment and its statement was adequately referred to in the item; and while a warning would have been helpful, given the nature and context of the footage the broadcaster adequately considered children’s interests in broadcasting the footage during a current affairs programme at 7pm.
Not Upheld: Privacy, Accuracy, Fairness, Responsible Programming, Children’s Interests, Violence
During the Leighton Smith Show on Newstalk ZB, the host discussed verdicts in the Urewera Four case. The complainant phoned the programme and the host subsequently made comments about “nut bars” in New Zealand. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the discrimination and denigration standard: the standard only applies to sections of the community and not to individuals; it was unclear which section of the community the complainant considered was denigrated or discriminated against; and the host’s comments were clearly his personal opinion and were not specifically directed at the complainant.
Not Upheld: Discrimination and Denigration
An item on Campbell Live reported on a disabled boy who was left alone on a school bus for four-and-a-half hours. The item included footage of an interview with the manager of the bus company responsible. The Authority did not uphold the manager’s complaint that this breached her privacy: while the complainant could have been identified, the item did not disclose any private facts about her in a manner that would be considered highly offensive.
Not Upheld: Privacy
During an episode of Bomber’s Blog, broadcast on Triangle TV at 9.45pm, the presenter used offensive language while reviewing the week’s political news. The same language was displayed onscreen. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the good taste and decency standard: political commentary and satire are important forms of speech, and taking into account relevant contextual factors most viewers would not have been offended by the language used.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency
An item on Close Up reported on an incident at Fairfield College, Hamilton in which a group of teenage girls were admitted to hospital after taking drugs. The presenter included a summary of problems previously experienced at Fairfield College. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the item breached the controversial issues, accuracy and fairness standards: the item did not discuss a controversial issue of public importance, it did not create a misleading impression about the problems faced at Fairfield College, and the College was provided with a reasonable opportunity to comment and its response was adequately conveyed in the broadcast.
Not Upheld: Controversial Issues, Accuracy, Fairness
An episode of the reality TV series Police Ten 7 reported on an alleged assault and robbery at a supermarket car park in Wellington. The police interviewed the victim, a man with cerebral palsy and consequent speech impairment. The voiceover made comments questioning the veracity of the victim’s story and the broadcast included two shots of his footwear, a pair of women’s high heels. The Authority upheld the fairness complaint: the man was not adequately informed of the nature of the programme and of his participation, and there was insufficient public interest to justify broadcasting the footage without first informing him. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that the programme breached the privacy, accuracy, and discrimination and denigration standards: the man was identifiable but no private facts were disclosed and filming was in a public place; the commentary reflected the unusual circumstances and genuine views of the police; and the discrimination and denigration standard does not apply to individuals and the broadcast did not encourage the denigration of, or discrimination against, a section of the community. The Authority made no order.
Upheld: Fairness
Not Upheld: Privacy, Accuracy, Discrimination and Denigration
No Order
Campbell Live featured a story about a tenant whose family allegedly suffered health problems as a result of living on a property that contained traces of methamphetamine. The Authority upheld the complaint that the item breached the accuracy and fairness standards: it overstated evidence, creating the impression that a ‘P’ lab had existed when the contamination was marginal and could have been caused by smoking, and it failed to include a report which found no trace of methamphetamine. The misleading impression as to the source, location and quantity of methamphetamine contamination, as well as the implication the complainant had done nothing to remediate the problem, resulted in an unfairly negative representation of the complainant, and the complainant’s comments as included were insufficient to counterbalance the damaging implications made about him. The Authority did not uphold the complaint about discrimination and denigration, as the standard does not apply to individuals. The Authority ordered TV3 to pay $1,400 towards the complainant’s legal costs.
Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness
Not Upheld: Discrimination and Denigration
|
Order: $1,400 costs to complainant
An episode of Piha Rescue was broadcast on 16 January 2012 on TV One. The complainant emailed TVNZ’s “Viewer Correspondence” email address expressing concerns about the episode. TVNZ’s email response went into the complainant’s spam email folder. He then referred his complaint to the Authority on the basis that he had not received a response from the broadcaster to his original complaint. The Authority determined that it does not have jurisdiction to accept the referral because the complainant’s original email was not a valid “formal complaint” and TVNZ responded appropriately to his email.
Declined to Accept Referral
During an item on Campbell Live a reporter went in search of the famous British actor Michael Crawford in Kerikeri. A number of locals were informed that Mr Crawford was living in the area and the reporter was filmed outside his gate. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that this breached the privacy standard: Mr Crawford was identifiable but the item did not disclose any private facts about him.
Not Upheld: Privacy