BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

"They're like animals" was economist Gareth Morgan's description of the crowd at a

meeting of Auckland superannuitants discussing asset testing of the elderly. The remark

was included in a Frontline item on asset testing broadcast by Television One between

6.30–7.30pm on Sunday 20 February 1994.

Mr Morrill complained to Television New Zealand Ltd that the remark was slanderous and

encouraged the denigration of a section of the community on account of its age.

Describing the robust comment as the expression of a genuinely-held opinion, TVNZ said it

thus complied with the exception to the broadcast of comments which might encourage

denigration. It declined to uphold the complaint. Dissatisfied with TVNZ's decision, Mr

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

the Broadcasting Act 1989.

For the reasons given below, the Authority declined to uphold the complaint.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed the item complained about and have read the

correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). As is its practice, the Authority has

determined the complaint without a formal hearing.

Mr Morrill complained to TVNZ about an observation contained in a Frontline item on

asset testing the elderly broadcast on 20 February. He said that economist Gareth

Morgan's description of the crowd at an Auckland Greypower meeting as "animals" was

slanderous. Furthermore, he believed that the remark was likely to encourage denigration

of a section of the community on account of its age while expressing a legitimate political

belief.

TVNZ assessed the complaint under standard G13 of the Television Code of Broadcasting

Practice. The standard which was amended early in February 1994 now requires

broadcasters:

G13 To avoid portraying people in a way which represents as inherently inferior

or is likely to encourage discrimination against, any section of the

community on account of sex, race, age, disability, occupational status,

sexual orientation or the holding of any religious, cultural or political belief.

This requirement is not intended to prevent the broadcast of material

which is:

i) factual, or

ii) the expression of genuinely-held opinion in a news or current affairs

programme, or

iii) in the legitimate context of humorous, satirical or dramatic work.

TVNZ reported that during the item Mr Morgan stated:

The Government's really caught in this intergenerational divide. It knows what it's

got to do – people do have to provide for themselves – but it's got that mob who are

out there now whose wealth has gone – and they are a mob – you can see the way

they behave at some of these meetings. I mean, they're like animals. It's taken

students quite a bit of practice to get up to the level of bad behaviour they're up to

at the moment but they control quite a few votes – so that's where the

Government's caught between two generations.

It then explained that Mr Morgan, a free market economist, had been interviewed for the

item to provide balance in the debate about whether or not the state should spend more

money on old people. Acknowledging that Mr Morgan's tone was "blunt", TVNZ said it

was not inappropriate in the context of a forthright public debate. Moreover, as it was

"the expression of a genuinely-held opinion", it complied with the exemption in paragraph

(ii) of standard G13 and thus did not contravene the standard.

In his final comment to the Authority, Mr Morrill reported that, as a member of the

audience at the Greypower meeting in Auckland to which Mr Morgan had referred, he

like the majority of the audience had not shouted at the speakers. Mr Morgan, he insisted,

should have qualified his remarks.

The Authority began its deliberations by noting that the broadcasting standard to which

Mr Morrill's complaint was related was amended shortly before he lodged the complaint.

The previous requirement to avoid encouraging denigration of specific sections of the

community has been replaced by the requirement to avoid portraying people in a way

which presents them as inherently inferior. The prohibition on broadcasting material

which encourages discrimination remains. To ensure that Mr Morrill is not prejudiced by

this amendment, the Authority decided to review the complaint under both the old and

new versions of standard G13.

As another preliminary matter, the Authority noted Mr Morrill's remark that the majority

of the audience had not acted in an unruly manner. The Authority acknowledged that

remark but accepted that the visual evidence contained in the broadcast, while showing

that some of the audience was well-behaved, justified some observation that at least a

section of the audience had acted in such a way to warrant an observation about their

raucousness. Moreover, the Authority accepted that the word "animals" was not intended

to be taken literally. It is a common expression – used perhaps too loosely – but not really

intended as a literal comparison.

Overall, the Authority decided that the item which portrayed the depth of emotions felt by

some people about the policy they called "asset stripping" could not be seen as encouraging

either denigration or discrimination. In addition, the Authority considered that there was

no evidence to suggest that the item portrayed the elderly as inherently inferior in any

way. Finally, should there be any doubt about the conclusions, the Authority agreed with

TVNZ that the comment complained about, made during a programme which provided

the viewer with good factual information about the issues involved, was the expression of

a genuinely-held opinion. As a result, under paragraph (ii) it was exempt from the

general rule stated in standard G13.

For the reasons given above, the Authority declines to uphold the complaint.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Iain Gallaway
Chairperson
9 June 1994

Appendix

Mr Morrill's Complaint to Television New Zealand Limited

In a letter dated 24 February 1994, Mr M Morrill of Auckland complained to Television

New Zealand Ltd about a comment broadcast on a Frontline item on Television One

between 6.30 - 7.30pm on Sunday 20 February.

The item had dealt with asset testing for the elderly and included a comment from

economist Gareth Morgan about a Superannuitants Federation meeting in the Auckland

Town Hall. Mr Morrill wrote that, in regard to that meeting, Mr Morgan had said "The

crowd were animals".

Describing the remark as slanderous, Mr Morrill maintained that it breached the

broadcasting standard which guards against the encouragement of the denigration of a

section of the community on account of age for the expression of a legitimate political

belief.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint

TVNZ advised Mr Morrill of its Complaints Committee's decision in a letter dated 5 April

1994 when it reported that the complaint had been assessed under standard G13 of the

Television Code of Broadcasting Practice.

TVNZ explained that Mr Morgan had been chosen to comment on the superannuitants'

assertions because of his expertise as a free-market economist who often criticised the

Greypower demands in his weekly column in the "National Business Review".

In the interests of balance, TVNZ continued, it was necessary for the item to include a

proponent of the perspective that deficit spending should be resisted. Mr Morgan, TVNZ

believed, was an appropriate person to do that.

TVNZ's letter then included the following comment from the Mr Morgan contained in the

item:

"The Government's really caught in this intergenerational divide. It knows what

it's got to do - people do have to provide for themselves - but it's got that mob who

are out there now whose wealth has gone - and they are a mob - you can see the

way they behave at some of these meetings. I mean, they're like animals. It's taken

students quite a bit of practice to get up to the level of bad behaviour they're up to

at the moment but they control quite a few votes - so that's where the

Government's caught between two generations."

Observing that the tone was blunt, TVNZ said it then considered whether the broadcaster

was required to censor an interviewee who responded to a legitimate question in a robust

way. It decided that the exception in standard G13 which allows the expression of

genuinely-held opinion which might otherwise encourage denigration was applicable.

Furthermore:

It is Television New Zealand's view that the censorship of such genuinely-held

opinion is socially undesirable and contrary to the intent of Section 14 of the New

Zealand Bill of Rights.

Expressing regret that Mr Morrill was upset by Mr Morgan's remark, TVNZ concluded

that its broadcast was not a breach of the broadcasting standards.

Mr Morrill's Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, in a letter dated 7 April 1994 Mr Morrill referred his

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

Act 1989.

He did not accept that Mr Morgan's comment could be described as "blunt and robust" and

an exception allowed for by standard G13. It was, he continued, more than that in that it

slandered and denigrated an aged section of the community.

TVNZ's Response to the Authority

As is its practice, the Authority sought the broadcaster's response to the referral. Its

letter is dated 12 April 1994 and TVNZ's reply, 19 April.

TVNZ had little to add other than to emphasise that Mr Morrill objected to the expression

of a genuinely-held opinion advanced by a knowledgable observer. The reference to

Greypower meetings elsewhere, it added, were not extraneous to Mr Morgan's description

of what he perceived to be a "mob".

Mr Morrill's Final Comment to the Authority

When asked for a brief comment on TVNZ's response, in a letter dated 4 May 1994 Mr

Morrill recalled that he had been at the meeting where the audience was described by Mr

Morgan as a mob. Like most of the other members of the audience, he had been quiet

while he listened to the speakers and, consequently, he regarded the comment as

"slanderous". Mr Morgan's comment, he added, should have been qualified.

Acknowledging TVNZ's justified concern about censorship, nevertheless he maintained that

Mr Morgan's remark was not a true reflection of the behaviour of the majority of the

audience and the report was thus a distortion of the event.