NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE

No. 103

Authorities and Other Agencies of State

Broadcasting Standards Authority

Broadcasting Act 1989

Broadcasting Standards Authority—Decision Nos: 54/93, 55/93, 56/93, 57/93, 58/93, 59/93, 60/93, 61/93, 62/93, 63/93, 64/93, 65/93, 66/93, 67/93, 68/93, 70/93, 71/93, 72/93, 73/93, 74/93, 75/93, 76/93, 77/93 and 78/93

Pursuant to section 15 of the Broadcasting Act 1989, notice is hereby given that the Broadcasting Standards Authority has made the following decisions on complaints referred to it for investigation and review.

(i) In Decision 54/93, the Authority declined to uphold the complaint from Mr Kristian Harang of Auckland that the broadcast by Television New Zealand Limited of an advertisement for socks on 14 December 1992 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to maintain standards of good taste and decency.

(ii) In Decision 55/93, the Authority declined to uphold the complaint from Mr Brendan Roberts of Auckland that the broadcast by Television New Zealand Limited of an item on One Network News on 6 November 1992 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to show balance, impartiality and fairness when dealing with controversial issues.

(iii) In Decision 56/93, the Authority upheld the complaint from the Group Opposed to Advertising of Liquor of Hamilton that the broadcast by Television New Zealand Limited of an advertisement during Moro sports Extra on 25 January 1993 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters not to feature heroes of the young in liquor advertisements.

(iv) In Decision 57/93, the Authority upheld the complaint from the Honorary Consul General of Ireland, Mr Rodney Walshe, that the broadcast by Access Community Radio of Auckland of Information on Ireland on 8 November 1992 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to show balance, impartiality and fairness when dealing with controversial issues.

(v) In Decision 58/93, the Authority declined to uphold the complaint from Mr Ian Andrews of Waiheke Island that the broadcast by Television New Zealand Limited of Ren and Stimpy on 23 January 1993 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to maintain standards of good taste and decency, to be mindful of the effect on children and to ensure that cartoons avoid excessive violence.

(vi) In Decision 59/93, the Authority upheld an aspect of the complaint from Te Reo Takihi o Ngatihine of Whangarei that the broadcast by Television New Zealand Limited of Te Karere on 13, 16 and 21 October 1992 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to show balance, impartiality and fairness when dealing with controversial issues.

(vii) In Decision 60/93, the Authority upheld the complaint from Mr Brian Kirby of Auckland that the broadcast by TV3 Network Services Limited of an item on Nightline on 30 September 1992 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to present the news accurately, objectively and impartially.

(viii) In Decision 61/93, the Authority upheld the complaint from the Department of Social Welfare that the broadcast by Television New Zealand Limited of an item on One Network News on 4 August 1992 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to be truthful and accurate on points of fact and to deal justly and fairly with any person referred to in the programme.

(ix) In Decision 62/93, the Authority declined to uphold the complaint from Mr P. Connolly of Howick that the broadcast by Radio New Zealand Limited of Newstalk 1ZB on 11 January 1993 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to deal justly and fairly with any person referred to in the programme.

(x) In Decision 63/93, the Authority declined to uphold the complaint from Mrs Lyn-Louise Milnes of Auckland that the broadcast by Television New Zealand Limited of a musical interlude called “Nothing to Fear” breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to be truthful and accurate, to take into account accepted norms of decency, to respect the principles of law and to avoid portraying people in a way which is likely to encourage denigration.

(xi) In Decision 64/93, the Authority declined to determine the complaint from Mr Mike Loder of Auckland that the broadcast by Television New Zealand Limited of Shortland Street on 25 January 1993 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to avoid portraying people in a way which is likely to encourage denigration.

(xii) In Decision 65/93, the Authority upheld the complaint from The Warehouse Limited that the broadcast by Television New Zealand Limited of an item on One Network News on 2 December 1992 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to deal justly and fairly with any person referred to in the programme.

(xiii) In Decision 66/93, the Authority declined to uphold the complaint from The New Zealand Jewish Council that Radio Pacific Limited’s action, having upheld a complaint about the broadcast of a radio talkback programme on 28 December 1992, was inadequate.

(xiv) In Decisions 67/93 and 68/93, the Authority declined to uphold the complaints from Ms Susi Newborn and Ms Ann Becker, both of Auckland that the broadcast by Television New Zealand Limited of an item “Hard Labour” on Frontline on 11 October 1992 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to deal justly and fairly with persons taking part in the programme, to show balance, impartiality and fairness in dealing with controversial issues, to take care in the editing of a programme to ensure there is no distortion of the facts, and to avoid portraying people in a way which is likely to encourage denigration.

(xv) In Decision 69/93, the Authority upheld the complaint from the Group Opposed to Advertising of Liquor of Hamilton that the broadcast by Canterbury Television Limited of DB Sport on 9 November 1992 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to avoid saturation of liquor promotion.

(xvi) In Decision 70/93, the Authority declined to uphold the complaint from Mr Peter Boys of Auckland that the broadcast by Radio New Zealand Limited of Newstalk 1ZB on 19 March 1993 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to maintain standards of good taste and decency.

(xvii) In Decision 71/93, the Authority declined to uphold the complaint from Mr P. H. Dunlop of Pokeno that the broadcast by Television New Zealand Limited of an item on One Network News on 12 December 1992 breached the responsibility placed on broadcasters to show balance, impartiality and fairness when dealing with controversial issues.

(xviii) In Decision 72/93, the Authority declined to uphold the complaint from One New Zealand Foundation Inc. that the broadcast by Television New Zealand Limited of a Telecom advertisement was inadequate.