BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Warning: This decision concerns language that some readers may find offensive. 

Summary  

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

The Authority has not upheld a complaint about offensive language on My Kitchen Rules. The Authority found three instances of language across a 90-minute programme was not outside the expectations of the programme’s M-L classification (M – suitable for mature audiences 16 years and over; L – language may offend); the classification and onscreen warning provided sufficient information to make an informed viewing decision or to exercise discretion; and the broadcast would not cause widespread undue offence in the context. For the same reasons, the Authority was satisfied the broadcaster took adequate steps and provided sufficient reliable information to ensure children could be protected from potentially unsuitable content.  

Not Upheld: Offensive and Disturbing Content, Children’s Interests

The broadcast

[1]  My Kitchen Rules is an Australian reality television cooking competition where pairs compete against each other by hosting and cooking meals for the judges and other contestants.¹ The 8 October 2025 episode of My Kitchen Rules focused on contestants A and B’s ‘instant restaurant’ where they hosted and cooked for the judges and the rest of the contestants, including contestants C and D, as a part of the competition.

[2]  The episode was broadcast at 7.30pm, lasting approximately 90 minutes, and carried the classification ‘M–L’ (M – Mature Audiences: suitable for mature audiences 16 years and over; L – language may offend), which was shown onscreen at the beginning of the programme and after each advertisement break. A written warning was also displayed at the beginning of the programme at the bottom right of the screen: ‘This programme is rated M. It contains coarse language.’

[3]  Relevant sections of the programme include:

• Approx. 22 minutes into the programme: Contestant A returned from buying eggs for a dish, arrived at the same time as the judges and said, ‘Oh fuck’.
• Approx. one hour into the programme: Contestant C commented that A’s and B’s dish was ‘fucking bullshit’ (because outside of the competition B worked as a cook in restaurant kitchens).
• Approx. one hour and 10 minutes into the programme: In contestants C and D’s confessional interview, contestant D criticised contestant C, stating, ‘Oh my God! Because you fucking interrupted their critiques, just think the timing couldn’t have been worse. I think it was a) disrespectful to [contestants A and B] and b) disrespectful to the judges as well.’

The complaint  

[4]  Debbie Maher complained the broadcast breached the offensive and disturbing content standard of the Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, for the following reasons:

• ‘Sometimes the odd low-level swear words comes up which I put up with because it’s better than a lot of other shows, but I wasn’t happy when I heard high level swear words like F… and not beeping [it out] instead.’
• ‘Also there are a lot of children still up at that time where families watch it together with budding young chefs being inspired so that’s not a good example to hear that swearing in a family show.’

Jurisdiction – further standard raised on referral

[5]  On referring the complaint to us, the complainant submitted the children’s interests standard was also breached on the basis:

• ‘At 7.30pm there are still many children up and adults who think a cooking programme on at that time is harmless… and don’t often see the rating before it.’
• This show ‘is allowing F words where they didn’t before at 7.30pm’. There are plenty of other timeslots it could be shown, after 8.30pm.

[6]  Under section 8(1B) of the Broadcasting Act 1989, the Authority is only able to consider complaints under the standard(s) raised in the original complaint to the broadcaster. However, in limited circumstances, the Authority can consider standards not raised in the original complaint where it can be reasonably implied into the wording, and where it is reasonably necessary in order to properly consider the complaint.² 

[7]  The complainant nominated the offensive and disturbing content standard in the original complaint to the broadcaster but relied on the children’s interests standard in the referral to the Authority. While the original complaint did not explicitly raise the children’s interests standard, it clearly expresses concern for ‘children still up at that time’ and raises a type of harm which is unique to children, ie the ‘example’ such swearing would set for ‘budding young chefs’. The offensive and disturbing content standard is aimed at the general audience and would not adequately address the complainant’s concerns about harm to child viewers.

[8]  On this basis, we consider the children’s interests standard can reasonably be implied into the wording of the original complaint and it is reasonably necessary to enable a proper consideration of the complaint.

The broadcaster’s response

[9]  Television New Zealand Ltd (TVNZ) did not uphold the complaint under the offensive and disturbing content standard. On receiving the complaint referral, we sought TVNZ’s comments under the children’s interests standard. TVNZ submitted neither standard was breached for the following reasons (TVNZ’s emphasis).

Offensive and Disturbing Content

[10]  ‘My Kitchen Rules is a reality programme aimed at an adult audience.’

[11]  While some other episodes of the programme were classified G or PG, this episode (along with some others in the series) was certified M-L. ‘M means – Mature Audiences:  Suitable for mature audiences 16 years and over: Programmes might contain violence, sexual material, offensive language, adult themes, nudity, or other content that some children and adults find challenging. May contain material with a moderate impact and themes that require a mature outlook.’ ‘The L advisory means “language may offend”.’

[12]  ‘The programme was preceded by a descriptive warning which advised This programme is rated M. It contains coarse language, so parents could make an informed decision about whether they wished their child to view such material.’

[13]  M programmes can air from 7.30pm, which was the time this episode was broadcast.

[14]  M-L programmes ‘are not aimed at child viewers and there is an expectation in the [Code] that parents will monitor their child’s viewing of such programmes’.

[15]  ‘…there were three scenes involving the use of the f-word. None of these scenes showed the f-word being used in a violent or pejorative way, in all the scenes it was an expression of the contestants’ natural vernacular and was not designed to offend’.

[16]  ‘…this small number of low-intensity instances of the f-word is comfortably within viewer expectations of the M certification, particularly given the L advisory that signals the presence of coarse language to viewers’. The programme did not otherwise contain any material usually considered under this standard.

Children’s Interests

[17]  ‘[T]he episode was rated M and assigned an L advisory. It was also preceded by a written warning which stated This programme is rated M. It contains coarse language.’ (TVNZ’s emphasis)

[18]  ‘It screened at 7.30pm when M-L classified programmes are allowed to be screened.’

[19]  ‘The episode was appropriately classified and presented; TVNZ 2 is not obliged to censor programmes to remove coarse language so that child viewers may view them.’

The standards

[20]  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.³ The standard states:⁴

• 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.

[21]  The purpose of the children’s interests standard (standard 2) 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.⁵ The standard states:⁶

Broadcasters should ensure children⁷ can be protected from content that might adversely affect them.

Our analysis

[22]  We have watched the broadcast and read the correspondence listed in the Appendix.

[23]  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.⁸

[24]  The context in which the broadcast occurred, and the wider context, are important considerations when assessing whether the broadcast has breached either standard.⁹

Offensive and disturbing content

[25]  Relevant contextual factors were outlined in detail in the broadcaster’s decision on the complaint, described at paragraphs [10]-[19] above. Key factors relevant to our assessment are:

a)   This episode of My Kitchen Rules was classified M-L, indicating it was ‘suitable for mature audiences aged 16 years and over’ and contained language that may offend.¹⁰

b)  M programmes may be screened after 7.30pm and before 5am.¹¹

c)  A small logo stating ‘M-L’ was displayed in the corner of the screen at the beginning of the programme and for approximately five seconds following each advertisement break.¹²

d)  An onscreen warning was also displayed at the beginning of the programme, on the bottom right corner of the screen: ‘This programme is rated M. It contains coarse language.’

e)  There were three instances of coarse language across the 90-minute broadcast, namely the terms ‘fuck’, ‘fucking bullshit’ and ‘fucking’. In each instance they were used as exclamations as part of the contestants expressing their own opinions and reactions; they were not stated in an aggressive or abusive manner. Nor were they dwelt on or repeated.

[26]  We acknowledge the My Kitchen Rules episode contained material the complainant found offensive and that was not to the complainant’s taste.

[27]  However, the offensive and disturbing content standard does not prohibit offensive content from being broadcast outright. Our task is to consider the value of the programme as an exercise of the right to freedom of expression, and whether that was outweighed by any potential harm, in the context. Key considerations are whether the content complained about was outside audience expectations for the type of programme or the programme classification, and whether the audience was able to exercise adequate choice and control over the content they are consuming.

[28]  The Authority’s 2025 offensive language survey revealed that ‘public tolerance towards potentially offensive language in a reality television programme has softened considerably over the last four years’, with the largest decreases for more ‘common expletives’, including ‘fuck’.¹³ The survey reported a significant drop (13%) in the unacceptability rating for the term ‘fuck’ in a reality TV context.

[29]  Viewing the broadcast as a whole and in light of the contextual factors above, we consider the level and frequency of coarse language – three instances over the course of a 90-minute programme – was not so frequent or explicit as to be outside expectations of the episode’s M-L classification. The classification and content warning provided the audience with sufficient information to make an informed viewing decision.

[30]  In the context, we consider the broadcast was unlikely to cause widespread disproportionate offence or distress or undermine widely shared community standards. Accordingly, we do not uphold this complaint under the offensive and disturbing content standard.

Children’s interests

[31]  This standard is related to the offensive and disturbing content standard, taking into account the same contextual factors, but differs in focus as we consider harm that may be unique to children as opposed to a general audience.¹⁴

[32]  Applying the same factors and analysis outlined above, we are satisfied the broadcaster adequately considered children’s interests.

[33]  The broadcaster appropriately assessed the episode’s content and classified it M-L on account of the language. M programmes are permitted to screen after 7.30pm. The M classification indicated this episode was suitable for mature viewers aged 16 years and over; it was not targeted at children. The Code recognises:¹⁵

It is not possible or practicable for broadcasters to shield children from all potentially unsuitable content. The objective is to allow them to broadcast to a wide audience … while taking reasonable steps to protect children by providing viewers and listeners with information… Parents/caregivers share responsibility for protecting children and should use the information and tools available for this purpose.

[34]  The M-L classification and language warning provided audiences with sufficient information and opportunity to exercise discretion and protect children from potentially unsuitable content.

[35]  We therefore find no breach of the children’s interests standard and do not uphold the complaint under this standard.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Susie Staley
Chair
11 February 2026   

Appendix

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

1  Maher’s original complaint – 9 October 2025

2  TVNZ’s decision – 29 October 2025

3  Maher’s referral to the Authority – 29 October 2025

4  TVNZ’s response to the referral – 3 November 2025

5  TVNZ’s further comments – 17 November 2025

6  Maher’s further comments – 10 December 2025

7  TVNZ’s confirmation of no further comments – 10 December 2025

¹ TVNZ ”My Kitchen Rules” (24 November 2025) <tvnz.co.nz>
² Attorney General of Samoa v TVWorks Ltd [2012] NZHC 131, [2012] NZAR 407 at [62]
³ Commentary, Standard 1, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 8
⁴ Standard 1, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁵ Commentary, Standard 2, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 10
⁶ Standard 2, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand
⁷ A ‘child’ is under the age of 14 years.
⁸ Introduction, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand, page 4
⁹ Guidelines 1.16 and 2.1
¹⁰ Guidelines 1.4 and 1.8
¹¹ Guideline 1.16
¹² In accordance with guideline 1.10
¹³ Broadcasting Standards Authority | Te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho Language That May Offend in Broadcasting (17 November 2025) at page 34
¹⁴ Commentary, Standard 2, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 10
¹⁵ Commentary, Standard 2, Code of Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand at page 10