BSA Pānui - Year in review | Broadcasting Standards Authority

Number 169

Kia ora koutou

The BSA has published its 37^th annual report as New Zealand’s broadcasting regulator. While legislation to disestablish the Authority was introduced to Parliament in September, we continue in our role under the Broadcasting Act until law changes are passed and take effect.

In a challenging and uncertain environment, we’ve met or exceeded all our strategic targets for the year. We delivered robust decisions, published research improving our understanding of public trust in media and views on offensive language, while promoting knowledge of the standards system among broadcasters and the public.

Complaint trends

Complaint numbers have continued to fall from the near-record highs driven by Covid-19 in 2020-2022. This reflects changing media consumption habits, falling audiences for ‘traditional’ broadcasting, and many people’s reluctance to be named in decisions. But historically low complaint numbers and uphold rates also speak of the maturity of a system in which broadcasters, the Authority and audiences share a consistent understanding of standards.

Broadcasters handle many more complaints than are referred to us. The relative scarcity of referrals is testament to the diligence and care they show complainants. We’ve continued to support broadcasters with guidance and training on the standards system, and a regularly updated guide on complaints unlikely to succeed.

Demand for reliable information

The year saw further evidence of the public’s desire for reliable information they can trust. News and current affairs continued to dominate complaints, generating nearly two-thirds of those we handled, while a further one in six involved talkback radio. Consistent with previous years, over half of complaints determined involved accuracy. In the past year, we determined just as many under the balance standard (complaints often involve multiple standards).

Of the seven upheld decisions, four concerned accuracy breaches, two found breaches of the discrimination and denigration standard, and one related to a breach of privacy.

The year also saw the BSA receive its first two formal complaints about an online broadcaster. In a decision published in April, the Authority accepted jurisdiction, finding the broadcaster fell within the definition in the Broadcasting Act. We accepted the complaints under the BSA’s 2020 published policy on online programmes, and both were subsequently upheld.

Regulatory reform

As we noted throughout the year, and have done with increasing urgency for more than 15 years, the 1989 legislation we operate under is no longer fit-for-purpose.

We now await clarity over the future and timing of law changes to disestablish the BSA, while continuing to carry out our functions under the existing Act.

As we acknowledge in our annual report, legislative change will be needed soon regardless of whether the current Bill is passed, as industry levies continue to drop along with baseline funding, and it becomes increasingly hard to make an impact with an outdated statutory framework.

You can see our full Annual Report on the BSA websiteopen_in_new.

open_in_new

UK research echoes BSA offensive language findings

New research from UK regulator Ofcomopen_in_new echoes key findings from the latest BSA report on language that may offend in broadcasting: today's audiences are generally more tolerant of swearing but less accepting of language that demeans or discriminates against particular individuals or groups.

The Ofcom report reveals a clear distinction between attitudes to swearing versus discriminatory language: “While tolerance for swearing in programmes has gradually increased over time in line with societal shifts, audiences maintain that broadcasters should provide strong protections against harmful language which demeans or discriminates against particular individuals or groups.”

Participants feel discriminatory language can reinforce negative stereotypes, with offensive terms about race, nationality and ethnicity among those considered least acceptable – along with discriminatory language relating to sexual orientation, gender identity and physical and mental health conditions.

The BSA's surveys on evolving attitudes towards offensive language are one of the Authority's most anticipated and referenced pieces of research.

Findings from the latest BSA report can be seen hereopen_in_new.

open_in_new

Below you can see a round-up of recent BSA decisions, including those relating to election programmes, plus a brief digest of broadcasting related news and research. If you know of others who may find the resources and information in this Pānui useful, please feel free to share them via your networks.

Ngā mihi mahana

Stacey Wood

Chief Executive

open_in_new Featured decisions

Broad and Radio New Zealand Ltd - 2026-032 (28 October 2026)open_in_new

The Authority1 has not upheld a complaint alleging an item on Morning Report lacked balance and was unfair. The item reported on the condition of student rental properties in Dunedin – that ‘students continue to live in flats that are colder inside than out despite meeting Healthy Homes Standards’, and ‘advocates are calling for action’ as a result. The Authority considered the item did not purport to be an in-depth or balanced examination of the adequacy of the Healthy Homes Standards, but instead focussed on a particular perspective (advocates calling for change). Listeners were therefore unlikely to expect a countervailing viewpoint in the broadcast. Regardless, the audience could reasonably be expected to be aware of other viewpoints from other media, given the ongoing period of current interest. The fairness standard did not apply.

Not Upheld: Balance, Fairness

Neely and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2026-045 (12 October 2026)open_in_new

The Authority has not upheld a complaint about a National Party election programme that alluded to a reduction in crime rates under its leadership, which the complainant said was inaccurate. The Authority considered two statements made in the broadcast: ‘When National took over, our country was in bad shape,’ and, ‘By fixing the basics, inflation, mortgage rates and crime are all down…’ The Authority found the first statement was clearly an expression of the National Party’s opinion and political advocacy – and accordingly, the accuracy standard did not apply to it. The Authority considered the second statement was one of fact but that the National Party had reasonable basis for the claim, and reasonable viewers interpreting the statement in the context of an election campaign were unlikely to have been misled.

Not Upheld: E1: Election Programmes Subject to Other Code (Accuracy)

Reid and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2026-050 (27 October 2026)open_in_new

The Authority has not upheld a complaint about a Free Palestine Party (Palestine Free from the River to the Sea Party) election programme broadcast on TVNZ 1. It included statements onscreen: ‘Turn the tide for Palestine’; ‘Not a ceasefire… but justice’; ‘A right of return… to Palestine’; ‘Sanction Israel’ and ‘No sanctions – no vote!’ The complaint was that this ‘pro Palestine’ election programme was ’disturbing’, unfair, and gave a biased, ‘non-factual opinion’ of what is occurring in that part of the world. The Authority did not find any breach of the nominated standards or harm that would justify limiting the Party’s political expression. The election programme was clearly identified as promoting the views of the Free Palestine Party; the statements onscreen were clearly distinguishable as opinion and advocacy, rather than making factual statements; the advertisement did not seriously threaten standards of taste or decency, in the context; and the fairness standard did not apply.

Not Upheld: E1: Election Programmes Subject to Other Code (Offensive and Disturbing Content; Fairness), E2: Election Programme Advocacy - Distinguishing Factual Information from Opinion or Advocacy

Shores and Television New Zealand Ltd - 2026-051 (4 November 2026)open_in_new

The Authority has not upheld a complaint about a Women’s Rights Party election programme broadcast on TVNZ 1. The broadcast included a video montage of a protest at a ‘Posie Parker’ rally in Auckland in 2023. The complainant said this footage was distressing as it promoted ‘an anti-transgender and gender diverse agenda’. The Authority did not find any breach of the offensive and disturbing content standard or harm that would justify limiting the party’s political expression. The election programme was clearly identified as promoting the views of the Women’s Rights Party, and was focused on advocacy for women’s rights. The protest footage could not reasonably be said to promote a perspective that is anti-transgender or gender diverse people, and these groups were not referred to during the programme. Overall, the advertisement did not seriously threaten standards of taste or decency in the context.

Not Upheld: E1: Election Programmes Subject to Other Code (Offensive and Disturbing Content)