|
|
|
Number 75
Tēnā koutou katoa e whaipānga ki ngā kaupapa mahi a Te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho,
Koenei a Mahuru Māori, me te wiki o te reo Māori, nā reira ka whakanuia mātau i to tātau reo rangatira. Ko te ao papāho tetahi o ngā waka whakaora i te reo Māori. He mea nui ki a mātau te tautoko, te tauawhi hoki, i ngā mahi a ngā reo irirangi, me ngā whakāta-a-iwi. He mea nui hoki ki a mātau te mahi ngātahi me te hunga kaipāho ki roto i a mātau mahi. Heoi, e whai ake nei ko o mātau tikanga mo ngā mahi a Te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho, ki roto i ngā reo e rua. Nā reira, kia kaha ki a tātau ki roto i a tātau mahi katoa. Kia kaha hoki tātau ki te kōrero i to tātau reo Māori.
Ngā mihi
Belinda Moffat
Chief Executive
Greetings to you all,
As this is Te Reo Māori month, and indeed Māori language week, we are celebrating Te Reo Māori. Broadcasting plays a key role in the preservation and revitalisation of Te Reo. We value the work we do to support iwi radio and television broadcasters. We value also working with all broadcasters. Below are our refreshed BSA values in both Te Reo and English which set out our tikanga for the way we work. We wish you well in your work and encourage us all to speak and support Te Reo Māori.
Warm Greetings
Belinda
|
|
Kia tū motuhake
Tū motuhake ai mātau, a rōpū, a takitahi,
noho wātea ai i ngā awenga kē.
|
|
|
Be independent
We are impartial and free from influence, both as an organisation and as individuals within the team.
|
|
|
|
Mahi i runga i te ngākau pono
He pono, he mārama mātou, whakapono ai
ki te tika me te rite o a mātou mahi.
|
|
|
Act with integrity
We are honest and transparent, accountable for our actions, fair and consistent.
|
|
|
Awhi i te rerenga kētanga
He mea nui ki a mātou te rerenga kē o te whakaputa whakaaro,
ā, ka whakanuia ngā tirohanga me ngā wheako rerekē.
|
|
|
Embrace diversity
We value creativity, diversity and freedom of expression, and respect different perspectives and experiences.
|
|
|
Ka Mahi tahi
Mahitahi ai mātou me te hunga whai pānga, ā, piri pono ana ki te wariu o te mahitahi. Noho tuwhera ai mātou, māmā ki te torotoro atu, mōhio ki te whakatau me te whakarongo.
|
|
|
Work collaboratively
We work in partnership with our stakeholders and value the power of teamwork. We are open, accessible, respectful and we listen.
|
|
|
Kia whakanuia
Pupuri ai mātou ki ngā pae rewa o a mātou mahi me o mātou mātāpono. Mā te tika o te mahi, ka riro ake te whakapono me te aro tūturu.
|
|
|
Earn respect
We hold ourselves to high standards both in our work and ethically. We earn trust and credibility through principled action.
|
|
|
|
Kia tū kaha
He pakari, he kakama mātou i mua i te aroaro o tēnei ao hurihuri.
He pūkenga, he kaikaha mātou i roto i a mātou mahi.
|
|
|
Be Dynamic
We are resilient and proactive in the face of a changing environment. We are versatile and progressive in our work.
|
|
|
|
Did you know... ?
We have a fast-track procedure for dealing with election-related broadcast content and 'election programmes'. Complaints about political party and candidate election advertisements on television and radio can be made directly to the BSA. Broadcaster-produced election content complaints must first go to the broadcaster before determination. The BSA aims to determine election-related complaints within 3-5 working days. You can learn more about election complaints and the BSA's fast-track process hereopen_in_new. |
|
|
|
Complaint about Election Programming - Under Fast-track Procedure
|
|
| Curtis and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2017-065 open_in_new
A campaign clip for the National Party (an election programme for the purposes of the Election Programmes Code) was broadcast on TVNZ 1 on 28 August 2017. The clip featured a group dressed in blue running through New Zealand landscapes, who passed another group of four wearing red, green and black shirts with their legs tied together and struggling. On 4 September 2017 the Authority did not uphold a complaint that the election programme breached the Election Programmes Code of Broadcasting Practice and was misleading on the grounds it implied that National was only a single party in Government. The election programme did not imitate any existing programme, format or identifiable personality as envisaged by the misleading programmes standard in the Election Programmes Code. In any event, the election programme was clearly promoting a party vote for the National Party and viewers understand that election programmes by their nature are authorial advocacy and designed to promote the party’s vision, should it be elected. In these circumstances, the Authority did not consider viewers would have been misled. The Authority also emphasised the importance and value of political expression, particularly in the lead up to a general election. This decision, which was issued to the parties on 4 September 2017 (four working days after it was received), was made under the BSA's fast-track procedure for determining election-related complaints.
Not Upheld: Misleading Programmes
Read our media release on this decision hereopen_in_new. |
|
|
|
Complaints about Radio Broadcasts
|
|
| BL and MediaWorks Radio Ltd - 2017-025open_in_new
During Jay-Jay, Dom & Randell, the hosts discussed their conversation with a guest the previous day who was described as a successful voice coach, and who gave tips about putting on a ‘sexy voice’. One of the hosts prank called two phone sex chat lines and spoke to the operators to see whether they used a ‘sexy voice’. One of the operators he spoke with was the complainant, who discussed practical aspects of the service, including how calls were conducted and paid for. A distinctive sound could be heard in the background of the call. The Authority upheld a complaint from the operator that this broadcast breached her privacy and was unfair. The combination of the extended audio of the complainant’s voice and the background sounds meant that she could be identified by people beyond family and close friends who would reasonably be expected to know about her phone sex chat line business. The complainant was also unaware she was being recorded and did not consent to the broadcast of this information. This resulted in a breach of her privacy and was also unfair. The Authority did not uphold the remaining aspects of BL’s complaint.
Upheld: Privacy, Fairness
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Children’s Interests, Balance, Accuracy
Orders: $2,000 privacy compensation; $1,500 costs to the Crown
|
|
|
| Loder and Radio New Zealand Ltd - 2017-035open_in_new
A RNZ News bulletin reported on the NZ Police Association’s view that a recent spate of Police shootings was the result of ‘too many firearms getting into the wrong hands’. During the bulletin, the presenter said: ‘The Association’s President… says more than 20,000 firearms, including semi-automatic military weapons, are stolen or sold to offenders each year.’ The Authority upheld a complaint that the presenter’s reference to more than 20,000 firearms being stolen or sold to offenders was inaccurate. According to the Police Association, the President should have been quoted as saying ‘over 50,000 firearms enter the country each year, a number of which are stolen or sold to offenders’. While the broadcaster attempted to correct the quote in the online version of the story after the broadcast, the amendment did not correct the error, and in the Authority’s view RNZ’s audience was misled as a result.
Upheld: Accuracy
No Order
|
|
|
Smith and NZME Radio Ltd - 2017-042open_in_new
A panel segment during Larry Williams Drive discussed a recent High Court action brought by Phillip Smith against the Department of Corrections (Corrections), in which Mr Smith argued that his freedom of expression had been breached by Corrections staff preventing him from wearing his toupee. At the conclusion of the panel discussion, Mr Williams stated: ‘I say Janet, solitary confinement 24/7, dark room, with his toupee, with a little bit of waterboarding just to make it interesting’. The other panellists laughed, with one commenting, ‘You’re a hard man, Larry’. The Authority did not uphold a complaint from Mr Smith that this comment suggested he be subjected to an act of torture, which was in poor taste, and that the comment was likely to incite violence against him. The comment was clearly framed as a hyperbolic exaggeration of Mr Williams’ views for effect, and not a deliberate suggestion that Mr Smith actually be waterboarded. In the context of the broadcast, the Authority considered audiences were unlikely to have taken the comment seriously, and it was unlikely to have encouraged or motivated prisoners to act violently towards Mr Smith.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Law and Order
|
|
|
| Graham and Radio New Zealand Ltd - 2017-049 open_in_new
A radio play, Playing with Fire, was broadcast on RNZ National on 22 and 26 February 2017, around the time of the Port Hills fires in Christchurch. The play followed a family as they were evacuated from their home in rural Canada due to a forest fire. The focus of the story was the struggling relationship between married couple Judy and Arnold, and its effect on their son, Daniel (who was described as having learning difficulties). The Authority did not uphold a complaint that the broadcast of this play, around the time of the Port Hills fires, was in poor taste. Programme selection and scheduling decisions were ultimately at the discretion of the broadcaster, and the Authority recognised the high value of the fictional work in terms of the right to freedom of expression. The Authority noted that while the play featured one scene that might have been challenging for listeners affected by the fires, this scene was brief and clearly sign-posted, and did not reach the threshold necessary to find a breach the standard.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency
|
|
|
| Keane and Radio New Zealand Ltd - 2017-054 open_in_new
An item on Morning Report featured an interview with the manager of teacher practice at the Education Council. The interview discussed the Council’s drug testing of teachers and its ‘zero tolerance’ approach to cannabis use, and referred to a recent finding of misconduct against a New Zealand teacher who refused to undergo a drug test. The Authority did not uphold a complaint that the item ‘pushed’ marijuana use by teachers. The item did not promote the use of illegal drugs or condone the behaviour of the teacher referred to. Rather, it offered a robust examination of the Council’s methods of drug testing teachers and its ‘zero tolerance’ approach to cannabis use. In this context the item did not encourage listeners to use illegal drugs or otherwise undermine law and order. The item also did not contain any material which had the potential to adversely affect any child listeners.
Not Upheld: Law and Order, Children’s Interests
|
|
|
| HM and Radio New Zealand Limited - ID2017-063open_in_new
On 29 July 2017 the complainant raised with the Authority a complaint he had made to RNZ which he considered was outstanding, regarding the use of te reo Māori greetings and closings by presenters on RNZ National. The broadcaster had not accepted the complaint as a formal complaint under the Broadcasting Standards in New Zealand Codebook. The Authority therefore did not have jurisdiction to accept the complainant’s referral. The Authority further noted that, even if the complaint referral had been validly made, it would have found the content of the complaint to be trivial and vexatious, and would have declined to determine it.
Declined Jurisdiction
|
|
|
|
Complaints about Free-to-Air Television Broadcasts
|
|
| Sanders and Apna Networks Ltd - 2017-017open_in_new
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 |
|
|
| Ross and Māori Television Service - 2017-045open_in_new
East West East: The Final Sprint, an Albanian comedy film about an amateur Albanian cycling team, was broadcast on Māori Television at 8.30pm on 23 April 2017, during the school holidays. The film followed the cycle team as they made their way to France to take part in a race, only to learn that a revolution was underway in Albania, to which they chose to return. The film featured brief sexual scenes and material. East West East: The Final Sprint was preceded by a verbal (te reo Māori) and written (English and te reo Māori) audience advisory, warning that certain scenes and language may offend. The Authority found that the package of information about the film, including the film’s classification, 8.30pm broadcast and audience advisory, sufficiently prepared viewers for the sexual content contained in the film. The Authority found the sexual content was sign-posted for viewers and was in keeping with the quirky humour of the film. As such, the Authority found that the harm alleged to have been caused by the broadcast did not outweigh the right to freedom of expression, of both the broadcaster to screen the film, and of audiences to view it, and found no breach of the good taste and decency standard.
Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency
Read our media release on this decision hereopen_in_new.
|
|
|
Wyn-Harris and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2017-047open_in_new
An episode of Sunday, titled ‘The Price of Milk’, followed a reporter as he visited two dairy farms in the Hauraki Plains. The reporter spent time with two farmers, A and B, to hear their perspectives on their work and the issues facing the industry, such as the impact of dairy farming on New Zealand waterways, abuse of bobby calves and financial struggles. B operated a ‘low-intensive’ farm, with a focus on soil health and mixed pasture, while A used more traditional farming methods. The Authority did not uphold a complaint that this item was misleading, unbalanced and treated one of the farmers, A, unfairly. The item was clearly approached from the narrow perspective of the two particular farmers, and was focused on hearing their views about the issues canvassed in the item. As such, viewers would not have expected the item to represent all farmers or farming styles. The Authority did not agree that the item made a direct comparison between the two farms, favouring one over the other, and considered that all participants were portrayed positively in the item. Given the item’s narrow perspective, it did not amount to a discussion of a controversial issue of public importance, and was therefore not subject to the requirements of the balance standard.
Not Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness, Balance
|
|
|
Holland and MediaWorks TV Ltd - 2017-048open_in_new
The AM Show contained a number of items about Labour Party candidate Willie Jackson’s position on the recently released Labour Party candidate List (the List), and featured interviews with Labour Party leader Andrew Little and Willie Jackson. It was reported several times that Mr Jackson was disappointed with his position of 21 on the List, as Mr Little had ‘promised’ Mr Jackson a top-10 position. The Authority did not uphold a complaint that this was inaccurate and unfair. The segments amounted to robust political expression, which is of particular importance in the lead-up to a general election, and carried high value in terms of the right to freedom of expression. Viewers were likely to have understood the comments as political speculation, rather than definitive statements of fact, which is common in the context of political reporting. The audience was provided with ample information on the issue, including Mr Little’s and Mr Jackson’s viewpoints in response. Therefore viewers would have been able to form their own informed opinion on the issue and would not have been misled. Mr Little and Mr Jackson were given extensive opportunities to comment and could reasonably expect scrutiny in relation to their public roles as politicians, so they were not treated unfairly.
Not Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness
|
|
|
Edwards and MediaWorks TV Ltd - 2017-050open_in_new
An item on Newshub reported on Waitangi Day events around New Zealand, including Bill English’s first Waitangi Day as Prime Minister and his phone call with US President Donald Trump. The item also featured comment on English’s attendance at Waitangi Day celebrations in Auckland, rather than at Waitangi. Comment was provided by Mr English, as well as political editor Patrick Gower, who said: ‘Waitangi Day celebrations will go on the road… away from Waitangi, away from the cauldron that is Te Tii Marae’. The Authority did not uphold a complaint that this item reflected the Government’s desire to control the image of, and de-politicise, Waitangi Day. The Authority acknowledged the national significance of Waitangi Day, and the views of the complainant as to how it should be celebrated. However, it found that Mr English’s and Mr Gower’s comments did not amount to material points of fact in the item, being analysis or commentary on the events of the day. This was a generally straightforward news item reporting on key events during Waitangi Day, and did not purport to provide in-depth commentary on historic controversies canvassed by the complaint.
Not Upheld: Accuracy, Fairness
|
|
|
Webber and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2017-051open_in_new
An episode of Sunday, titled ‘The Price of Milk’, followed a reporter as he visited two dairy farms in the Hauraki Plains. The reporter spent time with two farmers, A and B, to hear their perspectives on their work and the issues facing the industry. B operated a ‘low-intensive’ farm, with a focus on soil health and mixed pasture, while A used more traditional farming methods. The Authority did not uphold a complaint that the two farms were not representative of dairy farms in New Zealand, which was misleading, unbalanced, and unfair to the farmers involved and to the wider industry. The item was clearly approached from the narrow perspective of the two featured farmers, who provided their views based on their own experiences. As such, viewers would not have expected their perspectives, or their farms or farming practices, to be representative of the industry as a whole. The Authority found that, while some aspects of the programme may have been challenging for viewers, this did not reflect negatively on those featured, or on the wider industry. Given the item’s narrow perspective, it did not amount to a discussion of a controversial issue of pubic importance, and was therefore not subject to the requirements of the balance standard.
Not Upheld: Balance, Fairness, Accuracy
|
|
|
Right to Life New Zealand and MediaWorks TV Ltd- 2017-052open_in_new
An item on The Nation examined the arguments of those in support of amending the legislation governing abortions in New Zealand. The item included interviews with women who had been through the process of obtaining an abortion, and featured comments from various other advocates for changing the law. The Authority did not uphold a complaint that this item was unbalanced because it did not include arguments opposed to the law change and decriminalising abortion in New Zealand. While the item discussed a controversial issue of public importance (triggering the requirements of the balance standard), it was narrowly focused on technical aspects of the current law governing how abortions are administered in New Zealand, and clearly approached the topic from the perspective of those in support of changes to the process for obtaining an abortion. The item did not examine the moral and ethical reasons for and against abortion itself, but rather the legislation which governs the process of procuring an abortion. As such, viewers would not have expected to be presented with the full range of views on abortion, including moral reasons against decriminalising abortion.
Not Upheld: Balance
|
|
|
McDermott and SKY Network Television Ltd - 2017-056 open_in_new
Peter Popoff Ministries is a religious programme hosted by controversial televangelist, Peter Popoff. This programme featured Popoff and his wife preaching and allegedly healing audience members, as well as testimonies from various attendees about miracles and financial rewards received from God after they bought Popoff’s ‘Miracle Spring Water’. The Authority did not uphold a complaint that the programme was ‘fraudulent’, as it took advantage of viewers who may be misled by the programme into losing money. The Authority acknowledged the complainant’s genuine and well‑intentioned concerns. However, it found that the accuracy standard did not apply to religious programming, such as Peter Popoff’s Ministries, and programme selection and scheduling decisions fell to the responsible broadcaster to determine.
Not Upheld: Accuracy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|