BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary  

[This summary does not form part of the decision.] 

The Authority has not upheld a complaint about an interview with Dame Jacinda Ardern on RNZ National, in which presenter Jesse Mulligan used the word ‘prick’ when asking Ardern about a past comment she made in Parliament. The complaint alleged the use of this language breached multiple standards. The Authority found it was low-level language that would not have surprised or offended most listeners in the context or alarmed or distressed any children who happened to be listening. The remaining standards did not apply.  

Not Upheld: Offensive and Disturbing Content, Children’s Interests, Promotion of Illegal and Antisocial Behaviour, Discrimination and Denigration, Balance

The broadcast

[1]  In her first New Zealand media interview for some time, Dame Jacinda Ardern spoke with Jesse Mulligan on Radio New Zealand Ltd’s (RNZ) Afternoons programme about her just-published memoir, A Different Kind of Power. The interview lasted approximately 30 minutes and covered Ardern’s reflections on leadership, her time in office, the Christchurch Call, COVID-19, her life and work since leaving politics, her political leadership, personal values and public experiences. The interview ended with a ‘quick-fire’ round of questions which included the following exchange:

Mulligan:        Do you regret calling David Seymour an ‘arrogant prick’?

Ardern:           What I said at the time was, as my mother said, if you’ve got nothing nice to say… I apologised for it and I did mean it.

Mulligan:        When your advisor said you left your microphone on… what did you think you’d said?

Ardern:           I’m not going to say that on air.

Mulligan:        It’s in the book!

Ardern:           It’s a family show, I can’t read it out loud. It’s another reason to buy the book, do you see?

The complaint

[2]  James Allardyce complained the use of the word ‘prick’ in the broadcast breached the offensive and disturbing content, children’s interests, promotion of illegal and antisocial behaviour, discrimination and denigration and balance standards of the Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand for the following reasons:

• ‘Swearing on a national show is unacceptable’ and requires ‘forewarning if this disgrace is allowed to occur’.
• It was ‘very similar’ to a recent television news broadcast where the c-word was bleeped out and ‘many people were offended’.

The broadcaster’s response

[3]  RNZ did not uphold the complaint for the following reasons:

• The segment was part of a ‘wide-ranging political discussion’. The word ‘prick’ was used in reference to a ‘significant news event in December 2022’ for which Ardern subsequently apologised, and the incident had been widely reported and was featured in her memoir.
• The word ‘prick’ is a ‘relatively low-level insult’ typically used to describe someone ‘considered stupid, unpleasant or annoying.’ It ‘does not feature on the BSA’s list of fairly or totally unacceptable words in broadcasting’.
• The term is ‘not considered seriously offensive by listeners of the [Afternoons] programme’. ‘Its use [was] appropriate, in the context,’ particularly given its relevance to the subject matter of the interview.

The standards

[4]  We consider the offensive and disturbing content standard (standard 1) and the children’s interests standard (standard 2) to be most relevant to the complainant’s concerns. The remaining standards raised are addressed briefly at paragraph [16].

[5]  The purpose of the offensive and disturbing content standard is to protect audiences from viewing or listening to broadcasts that are likely to cause widespread disproportionate offence or distress or undermine widely shared community standards.¹ The standard states:²

• Broadcast content should not seriously violate community standards of taste and decency or disproportionately offend or disturb the audience, taking into account:
  • the context of the programme and the wider context of the broadcast
  • the information given by the broadcaster to enable the audience to exercise choice and control over their own, and children’s, viewing or listening.

[6]  The purpose of the children’s interests standard is to enable parents and caregivers to protect children from material that disproportionately disturbs them, is harmful, or is likely to impair their physical, mental, or social development.³ The standard states:⁴

Broadcasters should ensure children⁵ can be protected from content that might adversely affect them.

Our analysis

[7]  We have listened to the broadcast and read the correspondence listed in the Appendix.

[8]  As a starting point, we considered the right to freedom of expression. It is our role to weigh up the right to freedom of expression and the value and public interest in the broadcast, against any harm potentially caused by the broadcast. We may only intervene where the level of harm means that placing a limit on the right to freedom of expression is reasonable and justified.⁶

Offensive and disturbing content

[9]  Attitudes towards taste and decency differ widely and continue to evolve in a diverse society such as ours. The standard does not prohibit the broadcast of material that is not to everyone’s taste or that some people may find challenging. Rather, it ensures broadcasts fall within the broad limit of not causing widespread disproportionate offence or distress or seriously undermining widely shared community standards.⁷

[10]  We are satisfied the use of the word ‘prick’ would not have unduly surprised or offended most listeners having regard to the following contextual factors:

• The Afternoons programme targets general adult audiences with corresponding context, tone and audience expectations.⁸ While it is broadcast at a time when children may be listening, children are not the target audience.
• The word ‘prick’ referenced a newsworthy historic political moment, widely reported in the media at the time and discussed in Ardern’s memoir.⁹
• It was fleeting in the context of the full interview which lasted approximately 34 minutes and covered a broad range of topics. Ardern did not repeat the word, and even resisted discussing it further, saying, ‘It’s a family show, I can’t read that out loud.’
• The tone of the exchange was conversational and humorous. While the comment was originally directed at someone (David Seymour) it was not personally directed in this broadcast or repeated aggressively, and Ardern noted she had apologised and ‘meant it’ at the time.
• The interview did not contain the c-word or reference the earlier incident cited in the complaint.

[11]  Additionally, as noted by the broadcaster, the word ‘prick’ was one of eight words previously tested in surveys by the Authority of Language that may offend in broadcasting but removed in 2021 on the basis earlier results indicated it was low-level language, ranking 27th in terms of its unacceptability out of 31 terms surveyed.¹⁰

[12]  We find no harm under this standard that justifies our intervention or limiting the broadcaster’s right to freedom of expression.

Children’s interests

[13]  This standard is related to the offensive and disturbing content standard, taking into account the same contextual factors, but differs in focus, directed towards harm that may be unique to children rather than the audience in general.¹¹

[14]  Applying the contextual factors outlined above, we are satisfied the broadcast would not have unduly harmed or distressed any children who happened to be listening. While the interview aired at 3.40pm on a weekday, which is recognised as a time when children may be listening in the car or at home, Afternoons is not targeted at child listeners. The language complained about was fleeting in the context of the full interview and delivered in a non-aggressive and adult-focused setting.

[15]  We do not uphold the complaint under this standard.

Remaining standards

[16]  The complainant did not explain how the remaining standards nominated in the complaint were breached. We are satisfied, in any event, they do not apply or were not breached for the following reasons:

• The purpose of the promotion of illegal or antisocial behaviour standard (standard 3) is to prevent broadcasts that encourage audiences to break the law or are otherwise likely to promote criminal or serious antisocial activity.¹² The use of the word ‘prick’ in the context of this broadcast does not raise any issues under this standard.
• The discrimination and denigration standard (standard 4) only applies to recognised sections of the community and does not apply to comments aimed at individuals, which are dealt with under the fairness standard.¹³ The broadcast quoted a phrase originally used by Ardern herself in Parliament (in relation to one individual) and did not encourage the denigration of, or discrimination against any section of the community.
• The isolated reference to a political comment from 2022 does not amount to a discussion of a controversial issue or trigger the requirement to present alternative viewpoints under the balance standard (standard 5).

For the above reasons the Authority does not uphold the complaint. 

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Susie Staley
Chair
26 August 2025   

Appendix

The correspondence listed below was received and considered by the Authority when it determined this complaint:

1  Allardyce’s original complaint – 6 June 2025

2  RNZ’s decision – 12 June 2025

3  Allardyce’s referral to the Authority – 17 June 2025

4  RNZ’s response to the referral – 19 June 2025

¹ Commentary, Standard 1, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 8
² Standard 1, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
³ Commentary, Standard 2, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 10
⁴ Standard 2, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁵ A ‘child’ is under the age of 14 years
⁶ Introduction, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 4
⁷ Commentary, Standard 1, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 8
⁸ Afternoons <rnz.co.nz>
⁹ Jane Patterson “Ardern apologies after calling Seymour ‘arrogrant prick’ in Parliament’” Radio New Zealand (online ed, 13 December 2022); Eva Corlett “Jacinda Ardern caught on hot-mic calling minor opposition party leader an ‘arrogrant prick’” The Guardian (online ed, 13 December 2022); Jacinda Ardern A Different Kind of Power (Penguin Random House Australia and New Zealand, 2025) at 320-321
¹⁰ Broadcasting Standards Authority | Te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho Language that may offend in broadcasting (17 February 2022) at 6, citing Broadcasting Standards Authority | Te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho Language that may offend in broadcasting (17 July 2018) at 6
¹¹ Commentary, Standard 2, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at 10
¹² Commentary, Standard 3, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at 11
¹³ Commentary, Standard 4, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at 12