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 which allegedly featured ‘gendered and vulgar’ language on Heather du Plessis-Allan Drive. The presenter suggested the Prime Minister needed to grow ‘a bigger set of balls’ in response to his handling of the resignation of cabinet minister Andrew Bayly. The Authority concluded the presenter’s language, while provocative, was unlikely to cause widespread undue offence or distress among the audience.

Not Upheld: Offensive and Disturbing Content 

The broadcast

[1]  The 10 March 2025 broadcast of Heather du Plessis-Allan Drive (hosted by Ryan Bridge) included an opinion piece focusing on Opposition leader Chris Hipkins and Prime Minister (PM) Christopher Luxon. Relevant excerpts of the broadcast follow:

Question, does anybody seriously think, seriously think, that Chris Hipkins is the answer to all of our problems? That Chris Hipkins will be the next Prime Minister of New Zealand? No.

…

Luxon is doing all the right things and hitting all the right issues, cost of living and now growth, but he's just not that likable, is he? But that’s OK. This is not a beauty contest, it’s an election that he will be fighting in 2026 and by then…forecasts have us back in growth, inflation tamed, people feeling better, people feeling a bit more upbeat, voters in a better mood come election time 2026 and all of that will help Luxon.

…

And today, how frustrating. Another example of [Luxon’s] political instincts letting him down. This time, it's again Andrew Bayly. He did something supposedly bad, although nobody actually really knows how bad, but bad enough to resign as a Minister. And then he asks to go on leave for two weeks to go hike in Nepal, and they let him go. Come on. He should have been made to sit in the back of the House and take his shame and take his punishment. Letting him skive off even though he's taking leave just looks bad. Luxon needs to grow a pair, a bigger set of balls, and get a bit tougher.

The complaint

[2]  Anthony Grant complained the broadcast breached the offensive and disturbing content standard of the Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand for the following reasons:

• The phrase ‘needs to grow a bigger set of balls’ is ‘crude, unhelpful and unnecessary language to express dismay at the performance of public officials including the PM’.
• There are more constructive ways to express disappointment without resorting to such gendered or vulgar language.
• The comments are ‘disrespectful’ to the office of the PM.

The broadcaster’s response

[3]  NZME Radio Ltd (NZME) acknowledged the complainant found the comment ‘vulgar and rude’ but did not uphold the complaint for the following reasons:

• Newstalk ZB is targeted at adults aged 40 to 59.
• Ryan Bridge is known for being ‘frank and direct’ and holding ‘strong and provocative opinions’.
• This comment is not inconsistent with listeners’ expectations of Bridge.
• This was the sole complaint about the broadcast.
• The comment is similar to one made by du Plessis-Allan about Dr Ashley Bloomfield in 2024.¹ The comment in the current complaint is ‘comparable to the remark made by the host in [that decision], such that the outcome of the Authority’s consideration should be the same’.
• The term “bigger balls” is an idiom which is in popular usage as a colloquial way of describing someone who has courage or takes risks.
• Bridge used the term in that context and in the context of his belief that Christopher Luxon needed to get ‘a bit tougher’.
• Bridge’s comment did not reach a level of harm that would make a limitation on the right to freedom of expression reasonable and justified.

The standard

[4]  The purpose of the offensive and disturbing content standard (standard 1) 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.² The standard states:³

• 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; and
  • the information given by the broadcaster to enable the audience to exercise choice and control over their own, and children’s, viewing or listening.

Our analysis

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

[6]   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.⁴

Offensive and disturbing content

[7]  We acknowledge the complainant found Bridge’s comment offensive and that other listeners may have as well. However, we do not consider the broadcast would have disproportionately offended or distressed its audience, nor seriously violated community standards of taste and decency. 

[8]  The context in which content is expressed is an important consideration when assessing whether a broadcast has breached this standard. In this case:

• Heather du Plessis-Allan Drive is branded as a live radio show centred on news and the presenter’s opinions on current affairs.⁵
• Heather du Plessis-Allan Drive airs on Newstalk ZB, a station with an adult target audience.
• Newstalk ZB audiences expect to be exposed to controversial or unpopular points of view.
• The relevant phrase was used once, in the context of challenging Luxon’s management of issues with Andrew Bayly, and in the broader context of considering Luxon’s prospects of re-election in 2026.

[9]  The phrase was not tested in the Authority’s latest Language that may offend in broadcasting survey. Additionally, it was not mentioned by survey respondents when asked to identify any additional phrases they found offensive.⁶

[10]  While it may be regarded as a crude metaphor equating male anatomy with bravery or strength, similar phrases have been used in other New Zealand political commentary when criticising perceived weakness in leadership or performance.⁷  

[11]  In this context, we have identified no harm is likely to have been caused by Bridge’s comments which would be sufficient to justify our intervention. Accordingly, we do not uphold this complaint under the offensive and disturbing content standard.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Pulotu Tupe Solomon-Tanoa’i
Acting Chair
30 June 2025   

Appendix

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

1  Grant’s original complaint – 10 March 2025

2  NZME’s decision – 3 April 2025

3  Grant’s referral to the Authority – 3 April 2025

4  NZME’s response to the referral – 28 April 2025

5  NZME’s confirmation of no further comments – 28 April 2025

6  Grant’s final comments – 30 April 2025

¹ See Grant and NZME Radio Ltd, Decision No. 2024-061
² Commentary, Standard 1, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 8
³ Standard 1, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁴ Introduction, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 4
⁵ See, for example, Tamihere and NZME Radio Ltd, Decision No. 2022-095
⁶ Broadcasting Standards Authority | Te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho Language that may offend in broadcasting (17 February 2022) at 17
⁷ Vita Molyneax “Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern needs to ‘grow some balls’ and reveal how she will vote in cannabis referendum, says Duncan Garner” Stuff (online ed, 19 February 2020); “Labour has more ‘balls’, says Goff” NZ Herald (online ed, 28 October 2011)