Search Rapua

Search Decisions
Broadcast Information
Codes and Standards
Date Range
Showing 1 - 9 of 9 results.
SORT BY
Decisions
Sanders and Apna Networks Ltd - 2017-017 (9 August 2017)
2017-017

Kaho Naa… Pyaar Hai (Say… You’re in Love), a Bollywood romantic thriller film, was broadcast on free-to-air television channel APNA TV between 3pm and 6pm. The film featured action scenes containing violence. The Authority upheld a complaint that the film breached a number of broadcasting standards. The film was broadcast unclassified and with an incorrect programme description, which meant audiences were unable to make an informed viewing choice and were unable to regulate their own, and their children’s, viewing behaviour. The film’s inclusion of violent imagery such as beatings, shoot-outs, murder and dead bodies, and the visual depiction of these acts occurring onscreen, warranted an AO classification and later time of broadcast on free-to-air television. The film’s content would have been outside audience expectations of the programme, and child viewers, who were likely to be watching at the time of broadcast, were unable to be protected from material that had the potential to adversely affect them. The Authority did not uphold the complaint under the law and order standard.

Upheld: Programme Information, Children’s Interests, Good Taste and Decency, Violence; Not Upheld: Law and Order

Orders: Section 13(1)(a) broadcast statement; section 16(4) costs to the Crown $1,500

Decisions
VR and Apna Networks Ltd - 2014-033
2014-033

APNA 990 broadcast a segment disclosing that a named company allegedly owed it money and asking for the director of that company to ‘contact us [as soon as possible] to sort out the account’. The Authority upheld the complaint that the broadcast breached the privacy of the company director because a debt is a private matter between the debtor and the person or company to whom the debt is owed. The disclosure was highly offensive as the complainant could reasonably expect the debt to remain private, and there was no public interest in disclosing it to the public at large.

Upheld: Privacy

Orders: Section 13(1)(d) $1,000 compensation to the complainant for breach of privacy; Section 16(4) $1,000 costs to the Crown

Decisions
Lal and Radio Tarana and Apna Networks Ltd - 2011-044
2011-044

Apna 990 “radio-thon”. Allegedly broadcast statement that eight Fijian nationals had died in Christchurch earthquake. Not upheld (accuracy, responsible programming, and good taste and decency).

Decisions
NJ and Apna Networks Ltd - 2010-066
2010-066

Apna Ne Bana Di Jodi. Broadcast of personal ads that included complainant’s age, gender and phone number. Upheld (privacy). Order ($500 costs to complainant).

Decisions
Lateef and Apna Networks Ltd - 2010-129
2010-129

APNA 990 Pakistan Flood Appeal Talkathon. Caller allegedly referred to complainant and his wife. Declined to determine (privacy, accuracy and fairness).

Decisions
Moshims Discount House Ltd and Apna Networks Ltd - 2009-048
2009-048

Apna talkback. Discussion about expired food sent as aid to Fiji flood victims. Accuracy, fairness, discrimination and denigration, and responsible programming. Not upheld.

Decisions
Ram and Apna Networks Ltd - 2008-135
2008-135

Bhajan Sanghra. Host voiced concerns regarding what the National-led government would do to assist and support the New Zealand Indian community. Good taste and decency, controversial issues. Not upheld.

Decisions
Shandil and Apna Networks Ltd - 2006-049
2006-049

Apna special talkback show on first birthday. Host's actions and comments. Balance, accuracy, privacy. Not upheld.

Decisions
Chand and Apna Networks Ltd - 2006-005
2006-005

Apna 990AM. Various statements. Balance, accuracy, action taken. Not upheld.