Assignment. Programme investigated impact of social policy changes on low income housing. Not upheld (balance).
One Network News. Item reported on reaction to an anti-homosexual film screened at an open meeting of a Hamilton church group. Not upheld (balance).
3 National News. Item discussed New Zealand First's immigration policy. Invited guest on the programme referred to people as having "slit eyes" or "slant eyes". Complaint that comment was was offensive and racist. Not upheld (good taste and decency, discrimination and denigration).
Political advertisements on radio and television abbreviated name of ‘NZ National Party’. Complaint that this could be misleading for voters. Not upheld (accuracy).
Samuri Pizza Cats. Complaint that animated cartoon show aimed at children and broadcast on weekdays included sexual connotations. Not upheld (good taste and decency, discrimination and denigration).
Local Edition. Presenter's comment about 'Italian style of government'. Not upheld (good taste and decency, accuracy, discrimination and denigration).
Express Report. Episode dealt with physical sexual practices of gay men and some of the health risks involved. Not upheld (good taste and decency).
Good Morning. Topic was Argentina, and drinking hours of bars in Buenos Aires were referred to briefly. Complaint that the presenter implied that the drinking habits of the Italians were responsible for the high crime rate in Argentina. Declined to determine (discrimination and denigration): apparent that the item did not contain the implication claimed by the complainant.
One Network News. News coverage of Anglo-Irish relations in June–July 1996 was the subject oftwo complaints: in June, the news coverage mainly dealt with IRA bombings in Northern Ireland and elsewhere; in July, coverage highlighted the consequences of police first stopping a controversial march by Orangemen in Portadown and then allowing it to proceed. The subsequent bombing of an Enniskillen hotel was also reported. Not upheld (balance).
20/20: "Cut and Thrust". In two broadcasts, the item examined dismissal of surgeon following a report from the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons which highlighted concerns about his assessment, judgment and management of patients referred for rectal and colonic surgery. The College complained that the broadcast distorted some facts and was seriously flawed in the way that the College had been treated. HealthCare Otago complained that the item was both unfair and unbalanced and that it contained unsubstantiated allegations against the surgeon's former colleagues. Upheld (fairness): the broadcast was unfair to HealthCare Otago in one aspect. No order.