BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

During a discussion with the author of a book about male attitudes in New Zealand,

broadcast on Nine to Noon on 9 May 1996, the presenter remarked in regard to child

rearing that a man's participation might be "a five minute involvement with the

process at the beginning of it all".

Mr Stemson complained to New Zealand Public Radio Ltd, the broadcaster, that the

comment was offensive, sexist and stereotyping. He referred to the extensive number

of paternal emotional and other bonds during childhood and childraising.

Explaining that the comment focussed on conception only, NZPR declined to uphold

the complaint. Dissatisfied with NZPR's decision, Mr Stemson referred his

complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting

Act 1989.

For the reasons below, the Authority declines to determine the complaint.

Decision

The members of the Authority have listened to the interview complained about and

have read the correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). As is its practice, the

Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

The author (Jock Phillips) of a book about the male culture in New Zealand was

interviewed (by Kim Hill) on Nine to Noon on 9 May 1996. Discussing children, the

interviewer commented that a man's participation might be "a five-minute

involvement with the process at the beginning of it all".

Mr Stemson complained to NZPR that the comment was offensive and implied

irresponsible behaviour. He outlined the extensive paternal involvement in child

rearing and described the interviewer's comment as sexist stereotyping.

NZPR assessed the complaint under standards R2, R9, R6 and R31 of the Radio Code

of Broadcasting Practice. The first three require broadcasters:

R2  To take into consideration currently accepted norms of decency and good

taste in language and behaviour, bearing in mind the context in which any

language or behaviour occurs.

R9  To show balance, impartiality and fairness in dealing with political

matters, current affairs and all questions of a controversial nature, making

reasonable efforts to present significant points of view either in the same

programme or in other programmes within the period of current interest.

R6 To respect the principles of law which sustain our society

The other one reads:

R31 Where programme content is likely to disturb or encourage deviant

behaviour by people under the age of 15 years, broadcasters should use

reasonable endeavours to schedule the programme content outside of

normal listening hours for children.

Explaining that the comment referred to conception, not to the broader issue of child

rearing, NZPR declined to uphold the complaint.

Having listened to the tape, the Authority concurs with NZPR. The interviewer's

remark focussed on the male's role at conception and did not refer to the later

emotional and material bonds. Accordingly, as the complainant has misconstrued the

comment about which he has complained, the Authority is of the view that the

appropriate way to deal with the complaint is to decline to determine it in all the

circumstances under s.11(b) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

For the reasons above, the Authority declines to determine the complaint.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Judith Potter
Chairperson
29 August 1996

Appendix

Mr Stemson's Complaint to New Zealand Public Radio Ltd - 10 May 1996

M D Stemson of Coromandel complained to New Zealand Public Radio Ltd, through

the Broadcasting Standards Authority, about an item broadcast on National Radio's

Nine to Noon programme on 9 May 1996.

The item involved a discussion with Jock Phillips, the author of a book about male

attitudes and practices in New Zealand. With regard to child rearing, Mr Stemson

wrote, the interviewer (Kim Hill) commented to the effect that "a man's involvement

is five minutes".

That comment, Mr Stemson said, was offensive and implied irresponsible male

behaviour. Relationships which lead to children, he continued, were based on

emotional bonds. Should the emotional relationship later come to an end, it was

replaced with legal ones involving access provisions and obligations for material

support.

Describing the comment as sexist stereotyping, Mr Stemson explored further the

importance of relationships between men and women during pregnancy and childhood.

The comment discriminated against men, he noted, explaining:

The comment is dangerous in that it reinforces the role of men not being there in

the family or co-parent roles and being inappropriate for them to be there.

Moreover, it belittled men and was dangerous in promoting anti-male attitudes. The

male input, he concluded, involved caring, supporting, sacrificing and many other fine

qualities over many years while involved in the development of children.

NZPR's Response to the Formal Complaint - 4 June 1996

Assessing the complaint under standards R2, R9, R6 and R31 of the Radio Codes of

Broadcasting Practice, NZPR said that the item complained about was a discussion

with an author about the new edition of his book. As such, it was not news or current

affairs and the standards applicable to such material were thus not considered.

NZPR addressed the observation about which Mr Stemson had complained. It wrote:

The comment at issue was found by the Committee to be related to the physical

limitations surrounding the female function of child bearing (not child rearing),

and noted in the brief, balanced discussion that the reference to the difference in

biological terms between the involvement of men and women in the generative

process (i.e., insemination and gestation) related by way of social circumstances

to some of the views encountered of the traditional roles in society of men and

women. It is beyond doubt that the comment explicitly refers to the process of

conception, not to subsequent family life and child-rearing.

As the complaint was apparently based on a misunderstanding of the presenter's brief

remark, NZPR said none of the standards seemed to apply and, consequently, the

complaint was not upheld.

Mr Stemson's Referral to the Authority - 3 July 1996

Dissatisfied with NZPR's response, Mr Stemson referred his complaint, through

NZPR, to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting

Act 1989.

Explaining that he was very poor and maintaining a home while attempting to settle an

insurance claim, Mr Stemson pointed out that he was distressed and therefore unable

to address his complaint as perfectly as NZPR "seem to demand". However, he said,

the item on Nine to Noon had dealt with current affairs as it addressed the issue of

sexual equality. That was a topic which was referred to frequently on Nine to Noon,

as were children's rights.

Accordingly, he wrote, the broadcast contravened the standards.

NZPR's Response to the Authority - 8 July 1996

NZPR explained that as Mr Stemson did not cite any standards, the complaint was

assessed against those which seemed most relevant to his concerns. Some of the

matters raised in the referral, NZPR added, did not seem to relate to the broadcast

complained about.

Mr Stemson's Final Comment - 14 August 1996

Mr Stemson explained that, despite NZPR's less than co-operative approach, he had

tried to comply with the complaints process.

As for the complaint, he insisted that traditional child rearing roles had changed and he

regarded the presenter's comment as "particularly damaging" in that it encouraged

gender rivalry. Five minutes might apply to rapists, he wrote, but was an insult for

everyone else. Because of the importance of equality, he questioned whether it was a

matter which should be dealt with by another interviewer.