BSA Pānui - 2023 Election Programmes Code

Number 133
Kia ora koutou

As you are all well aware, there is a General Election coming up in October. The lead up to an election is a busy time for broadcasters, while the lively political debate and discussion it generates can also give rise to complaints from viewers and listeners.

The BSA has a special Election Programmes Code which applies to broadcasts for political parties or candidates during an election period where those broadcasts promote or oppose political parties or constituency candidates or notify election-related meetings.

The Election Programmes Code also requires such programmes to comply with all relevant standards (except the balance standard) in the general Code of Broadcasting Standards. That document was published last year after a review – in consultation with broadcasters, other stakeholders and the public – which saw three separate Codes for radio, free-to-air and pay TV rolled into one.

In advance of this year’s General Election, we will be publishing our 2023 Election Programmes Code. This is simply to enable update of references to our old Codebook (with the three separate Codes) to better reflect the new single Code which came into effect in July 2022. The Election Programmes Code is otherwise entirely unchanged from the version we published, following a full review, ahead of the 2020 election.

A copy of the text with these updates can be seen hereopen_in_new.

The 2023 Election Programmes Code will be published mid-year and will apply during the election period (from 10 September until midnight 13 October (the night before election day)).

We’ll look forward to working with you in implementing the Code over that period.

In the meantime, if you have any queries or comments about the changes, please don’t hesitate to get in touch. Any feedback can be provided to info@bsa.govt.nz by Monday 15 May 2023.

Ngā mihi nui
Helen Cruse
Acting Chief Executive

FEATURED DECISIONS

FREE-TO-AIR TV


Chilton & New Zealand Greyhound Racing Association Inc and Discovery NZ Ltd - 2022-134 (7 March 2023) open_in_new

The Authority has not upheld complaints a segment on AM interviewing the SPCA’s Science Officer, Dr Alison Vaughan, breached the balance, accuracy and fairness standards. Dr Vaughan discussed the organisation’s desire to end commercial greyhound racing in New Zealand and invited viewers to contact the Minister of Racing to support that cause. The complainants considered the segment presented only one perspective on the issue and did not attempt to balance it with other perspectives. The Authority found the segment was clearly introduced as presenting a particular perspective, and other perspectives would have been known to viewers given the issue had long-standing interest in NZ. The segment was also materially accurate, or otherwise reflecting Dr Vaughan’s analysis, comment or opinion, to which the accuracy standard does not apply. The fairness standard did not apply as no organisation was referred to in the broadcast.

Not Upheld: Balance, Accuracy, Fairness

RADIO


Adam & Crawford and Radio New Zealand Ltd - 2022-067 (27 February 2023) open_in_new

Warning — This decision contains references to sexual violence.

The Authority has not upheld complaints an interview on Saturday Morning between Kim Hill and Dr Kathleen Stock, a gender critical philosopher, breached broadcasting standards, including the discrimination and denigration, balance and accuracy standards. The broadcast discussed Dr Stock’s perspective on gender identity and her experiences resulting from voicing her perspective, having resigned from her position following a student campaign that accused her of transphobia. The Authority acknowledged the potential harm of the interview, but ultimately found the importance of freedom of expression outweighed any harm caused. The broadcast was clearly signalled as presenting Dr Stock’s perspective, to which she was entitled, and throughout the interview Hill challenged Dr Stock’s views, leaving the audience with a more balanced impression on the issue. Considered as a whole, the broadcast was unlikely to encourage discrimination, and listeners would not have expected the presentation of further alternative perspectives in a broadcast of this nature. A majority of the Authority considered the points alleged to be inaccurate were either opinion (to which the accuracy standard does not apply) or not materially inaccurate. The minority considered two points (that trans women were men, and trans women were more likely to sexually assault people in jail) were materially inaccurate. The violence standard was not breached.

Not Upheld by Majority: Discrimination and Denigration, Accuracy, Balance, Violence

LATEST DECISIONS

NEWS AND RESEARCH

Subscribe to the BSA Pānui newsletteropen_in_new