The Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) – you know, the organisation tasked to protect broadcasting “standards”, but which has allowed them to slip to the point where we don’t actually even think that broadcasters let alone the BSA have any standards at all – yeah, them – they’re hopefully about to be scrapped. All because of some mumbo jumbo. Literally. They were more concerned about the phrase “mumbo jumbo” than they were about the blatantly obvious increase in the level of sexual and offensive material on free-to-air television. A spectacular own goal. And the potential demise of the BSA comes not a moment too soon. We take a look back at some of their decisions.
Show Script:
Bye Bye Mumbo-Jumbo BSA
The Broadcasting Standards Authority – you know, the organisation tasked to protect broadcasting “standards” which has allowed them to slip to the point where we don’t actually even think that broadcasters let alone the BSA have any standards at all – yeah, them, they’re hopefully about to be scrapped.
All because of some mumbo jumbo. Literally.
They were more concerned about the phrase “mumbo jumbo” than they were about the blatantly obvious increase in the level of sexual and offensive material on free-to-air television.
A spectacular own goal.
And the potential demise of the BSA comes not a moment too soon.
As far back as 2006, The Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA), in releasing its decision on the South Park “Bl***y Mary” episode, proved that it was unable to represent the community as a whole, and is more interested in the rights of a few to offend. The controversial episode of the animated television show South Park featured a menstruating Virgin Mary spraying menstrual blood on one of the programme’s characters as well as a cardinal and the Pope, and was rightly labeled “tasteless, crass and ugly”, according to the New Zealand’s Catholic bishops.
The BSA said the cartoon was of such a farcical, absurd and unrealistic nature that it did not breach standards of good taste and decency in the context in which it was offered. The BSA said to uphold the complaints would be an unreasonable limitation on the broadcaster’s right to free speech which included the right to satirise religious issues.
Well, specifically Christian. I’ll come back to that one.
In 2008 despite twelve companies withdrawing their advertising, an increasing concern about the level of sexual and offensive material on free-to-air television, and an acknowledgement by the Broadcasting Standards Authority itself that the programme contained ‘challenging content’ and ‘challenging language’, they failed to uphold complaints made against the highly offensive TV3 series of Californication.
The first 2 episodes alone featured explicit sex scenes including an explicit sex act with a nun, drug use, explicit sexual talk and innuendo, and the use of the ‘f’ word almost every minute (on average). Yet the BSA tried to excuse this objectionable content with lame and bizarre excuses such as the ‘sexual encounters were often more bizarre than satisfying’, ‘the scenes were matter-of-fact rather than titillating’, ‘the programme was preceded by a verbal and written warning’, the title of the programme indicated ‘challenging content’, and the ‘oral sex was implied’.”
In fact, in the same year, a Family First investigation of 15 programmes on four free-to-air channels between 6pm and 8.30pm in 2008 found a saturation of foul language and sexual innuendo.
Words featured during supposed ‘family viewing’ times included – well, I’d prefer to maintain standards on McBlog – but you can see the words in the image. Don’t spend too much time looking at them. You get the gist.
Among the worst offenders was Two And A Half Men which screens on TV2 at 7.30pm. Another programme of huge concern was Just Shoot Me which screens on TV2 at 6pm every weekday night and had constant sexual themes and innuendo throughout.
Also of huge concern was the number of programmes which are rated for Adult viewing only screening well after the watershed time of 8.30, yet were promoted between 6pm and 8.30pm. Examples included promos during TV1’s 6pm News for Virgin School screened at 9.30pm and Mistresses screened at 8.30pm, a promo on TV3 before 8.30 for Outrageous Fortune at 9.30pm including scenes of a strip show, and a promo for Playboy Mansion on C4 at 7pm.
Another area of huge concern for parents is the number of programmes which are rated for Adult viewing only screening well after the watershed time of 8.30, yet were promoted between 6pm and 8.30pm.
In 2010, TV3’s Nightline featured naked men in training for the annual nude rugby game in Dunedin. Images were full-frontal nudity, and there was no attempt to pixellate them. All okay says the BSA.
Also in 2010, a radio presenter read out the list of the 30 most offensive words as determined by the BSA. When a listener quite rightly complained, the BSA said that because the employer RadioWorks had apologised to the listener offended, that was sufficient. The Authority even noted that there was a clear intention to offend.
The clear message to broadcasters is ‘go for your life – be offensive – but just say sorry’
Which they did.
The 2010 promo for the documentary Penis Envy featured brief clips showing the subject matter of the upcoming program, which explored the male obsession with penis size, and was promoted at 8.10pm. When children would still be watching. The Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) did not uphold the complaint.
In 2011, a Prime TV programme on the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra included references to nudity, sexual activity and bodily functions where the complainants requested name suppression but were refused by the BSA. The BSA said “While we acknowledge that some of [Jeremy] Wells’ comments were clearly designed to shock and may have been unexpected for viewers unfamiliar with his style, in our view, overall, he was duly respectful towards the programme and towards the NZSO.” The programme screened at 8.35 pm (outside children’s viewing times – apparently)
The BSA also deliberately named the complainant – despite a request for anonymity. Of course the intention of the BSA was clear. By naming the complainants, families will be less inclined to speak up if they know they will have their name splashed across the media, and especially where they are complaining about what they consider a moral issue which they feel strongly about. The issue is not who complained, but whether the complaint was warranted. This is no different to Crimestoppers, CYF, the Department of Labour, and the IRD – all which allow for anonymous complaints.
In a story which got international attention, this coverage is from Nine News in Australia and it was also covered in The Australian newspaper, it’s OK to show close-up shots of vaginas undergoing surgery on television at 8.30pm, according to the BSA. An episode of Embarrassing Bodies, which showed nude shots of women and surgical operations, prompted a complaint from one viewer, who said it was “too much” for that time of the evening. The BSA acknowledged that some viewers would have found parts of the show unpleasant to watch. You think?
Also in 2012, a news story in which politician Hone Harawira described the Prime Minister John Key’s comments on asset sales as “bullsh*t” was not offensive, according to the BSA – despite it being aired in a 3 News item at 6pm. 6pm – well before the 8.30 so-called family watershed time. There was no beep. No attempt.
Of course, now it’s very common to hear foul language on the 6pm news.
You can see the incremental creep.
And also at the beginning of 2012, this report – Too much sex, violence and bad language
Sex and swearing on TV shows such as Outrageous Fortune has seen a steep increase in complaints to the Broadcasting Standards Authority over the past five years. The authority says increasing complaints reflect the unease some feel at the speed of change in community standards… A recent survey of 600 young New Zealanders aged 15 to 21 commissioned by Family First showed 57% of females and 45% of males agreed there was “too much sex, violence, bad language on TV”. Mr McCoskrie said… The BSA tries to argue that they’re representing community standards. We argue that they’re creating community standards by normalising it.” But BSA chairman Peter Radich said standards of good taste and decency were changing as they always had. “The pace of change is quickening and this is partly through the influence that the unregulated internet has, more especially on younger people.”
Yes the BSA were blaming everyone else including the “unregulated internet” – which they now call “special media”. Blaming everyone but themselves.
In 2013 the BSA released a paper called What not to Swear: The acceptability of words in Broadcasting, revealing that highly offensive words – deemed unacceptable by half of the respondents in their survey – can still be heard anytime from 8.30pm onwards on television in NZ, and often during so-called family movies.
The Broadcasting Standards Authority tries to argue that their standards are reflecting community standards and that there is a ‘softening’ of attitudes. However, it is quite clear that as they allow broadcasters to push the boundaries, the standards are lowered, offensive material becomes more mainstream, and is then used far more in the media,
In 2017
Jono and Ben allowed to use swear words, because their listeners expect it: BSA
The media report said
However, the [BSA] didn’t open the doors for everyone to start swearing on-air. The decision took into account [Jono and Ben]’s characteristics, which it said meant people were less likely to be offended than if a more conservative broadcaster used the term.
Oh, good to know. Broadcasting standards only apply to conservatives. And white people, I assume.
IMAGE – bsa 2018 naked attraction
In 2018, remember the furore around Naked Attraction. Businesses were lining up to remove their advertising slots – thanks to a very good campaign by Family First!, and 536 formal complaints to TVNZ.
The BSA rejected multiple complaints about TVNZ’s “Naked Attraction” series. In a stunning admission, the Broadcasting Standards Authority have said that they “do not have a general supervisory role”, and have endorsed a programme with an “unusually large volume of complaints” .
IMAGE – 2023 bsa naked attraction’
The BSA in their decision admitted that the programme went “a step further than where broadcasters have trodden before…” and that “Each programme was visually explicit to a level not in our experience seen on New Zealand free-to-air television before. Verbal discussions and descriptions were also explicit…”
Other significant statements made by the BSA in their decision include:
The level of nudity in Naked Attraction went beyond what most viewers would be accustomed to on free-to-air television in New Zealand. As the complainants have pointed out in their submissions, and as reported elsewhere, the first episode broadcast on 27 October 2017 included 282 shots of male genitalia and 96 of female genitalia.
The extent of nudity in this programme was exceptionally high.
…unusual levels of explicit nudity…
…Some viewers may have found the more detailed descriptions of sexual preferences and activity by the participants unduly confronting”
But you know – good to go.
In 2021, the BSA revealed where they were really at. They put out this document called Complaints that Are Unlikely to Succeed.
And basically they’re said that if you complain about these things, they’re not even going to bother to consider them. Don’t even bother complaining.
Now, the first one is entitled “Low Level Language”. Let me show you what it actually says. It says that words and phrases considered to be low level, bad language, include – and it’s those words, which I won’t say on this show.
They say that “While these words may not be everyone’s language of choice, they have become commonly used.”
Now, the problem with that they’ve become commonly used because groups like the BSA have allowed that kind of programming to infiltrate our houses, our living rooms, TV programmes. They haven’t bleeped out the offensive words anymore, and they’ve just allowed a free for all, which the broadcasters have fully exploited.
In fact, one of the other things they say when they talk about content for children is that they say that R16s can occur from 8.30pm. R18 programmes can occur from 9.30pm, and they say that the reason is because this is outside of children’s normal viewing times.
Even on weekends or during school holidays. Yep. Apparently during the weekend and school holidays, kids are not watching after 8.30pm and definitely not watching after 9.30pm. Meanwhile back in the real world, we know that they are, but that’s how out of touch the BSA is.
And as you well know, what is now an R16 wouldn’t even have been an R20 a decade ago.
There’s one other interesting aspect. In complaints about “Blasphemy”, it said:
The Authority acknowledges that when broadcasts feature exclamations of words associated with ‘God’, ‘Jesus’, ‘Christ’, ‘Hell’ and the Christian faith, some people might find this offensive. However, these words are not considered to be coarse language and in our modern secular society have become widely used as part of everyday speech. The Authority has consistently found variations of ‘Jesus’ and ‘Christ’ used as exclamations do not threaten widely shared community standards.
Now that’s interesting, because it talks about blasphemy, but then it specifically says that it’s a free for all – but just for one particular faith.
Note that it’s only the Christian faith. Blasphemy against the Christian faith is okay, but what about other faiths? Why aren’t other faiths included in this exemption? Are they saying that blasphemy against the Muslim faith is not okay?
I bet it isn’t – if a broadcaster was ever brave enough to allow it. There would be hell to pay – literally.
Why is it only the Christian faith that allows a free for all?
I guess one positive out of this is that apparently hell is okay now. I’ll let Israel Folau know.
It does show the double standards. And what the BSA are confirming here is that if they didn’t have double standards, that’d have no standards at all.
And then in 2019, it was Love Island – featuring an initial 12 contestants, typically clad in little more than their swimming costumes, constantly coupling and re-coupling. This is a programme with explicit sexual content and also explicit language. And there were concerns around body image and the messages it’s sending to young people, and especially young girls. Two UK contestants committed suicide after appearing on Love Island.
In the UK, Love Island aired at 9pm, the hour that marks the watershed after which adult content can be shown. In New Zealand, the watershed is at 8:30pm. Well – supposed to be a watershed. We know it’s not.
But what time was Love Island aired in NZ?
5pm. Yep 5pm when many children may be watching. But that’s all ok according to our media watchdogs.
Even The Spinoff agreed with me – and that’s saying something!!
I always remember when we were campaigning against the book Into the River. It was a highly objectionable book with extreme foul language including the c word, and explicit sex descriptions – and yet it received the Children’s Book of the Year award. Fortunately it has all but vanished now.
But when I went on both Radio NZ and TVNZ’s Breakfast – back in the day when they accepted guests with views they didn’t agree with, remember those days, no I can’t either – and they specifically told me not to quote from the book because it would be offensive and they would be subject to a complaint from the BSA.
So the book is not suitable for general broadcast for adults, but apparently it’s ok for young impressionable children to read. Go figure.
Broadcasters simply used the BSA as a cover for promoting dodgy books… and drag queens.
There was also their decisions on that awful Sunday programme which TVNZ fortunately scrapped anyway.
In one episode, Sunday programme examined conversion therapy – in one of the worst examples of journalism involving hidden cameras, entrapment, and coming to a conclusion that most viewers would not have naturally come to.
What we saw was undercover reporters deliberately misleading counsellors and covert filming of the conversation in an attempt to show “conversion therapy” in action. It was an explicit political campaign by Sunday programme and TVNZ.
What we didn’t see was conversion therapy as they would define it. There was no coercion. No ice baths. No electric shocks. We saw counsellors simply working with people according to their stated need which the counsellors assumed were genuine – but they weren’t.
The BSA said that the public interest outweighed privacy, confidentiality and entrapment.
But it was all about a campaign and pushing a narrative. It was media at another low.
Given the green light by a useless BSA.
In June 2023, we realised just how idiotic the BSA was. They issued new guidance on coverage of gender identity issues
Inclusive language
Inclusive language is unlikely to breach broadcasting standards, particularly when reporting on harm to underrepresented communities or groups adversely affected by a particular practice.
For example, in an item on trans men and non-binary people missing out on cervical screenings, the BSA found the term ‘people with cervixes’ was accurate and did not denigrate women.
Even though biology dictates that only women have one.
The BSA is not about standards. It’s about ideology.
Oh – and remember that story in 2022 about the arson to the Rainbow Youth building in Tauranga.
Now – no doubt about it. Completely unacceptable attack. Terrifying for the organisation and the people involved, and the offenders should be strongly dealt with.
But extreme activists immediately connected this crime – with Bethlehem College – and Christians – because it fitted the narrative
Ah yes more spurious claims from the Jussie Smollett of NZ – Shaneel Lal.
The problem was that the actual offenders weren’t Christian – didn’t have any association with Bethlehem College – no connection to any Christian group – no evidence of homophobia and transphobia (whatever that is) – if there was, the media would have been all over it.
But actually, there was nothing to see here but an unacceptable crime – by criminals with too much time on their hands.
But facts don’t matter to activists. Or some journalists. It certainly doesn’t matter to programmes like The Project – another programme which has thankfully been taken off air.
But facts don’t matter – especially when pushing a narrative.
You might be wondering – did The Project admit that porkies were told about Christians burning down a community centre. Well, a complaint was made to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – and they found that the false and defamatory claims by the activist “did not reach the high threshold justifying a restriction on freedom of expression. The comments were clearly their opinion which are exempt from the standard of accuracy.”
Even though they were wrong.
That’s the double standard these days.
Now to be fair, the BSA has got some decisions correct – and we have applauded them for this. But it’s a very high bar.
And these decisions have been the exception.
And the other thing is that as isolated incidences, all these examples I’ve shown you might have been forgiven as a bad moment of judgement. Perhaps. But it’s been the continual bracket creep that started at least 20 years ago that has got us to where we are now.
There are no standards anymore.
The BSA has sat back while standards have dropped to an all-time low.
Ironically, according to research released by the Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) in February 2026, New Zealanders’ tolerance for strong language, swearing, and offensive content in broadcasting has fallen (not increased as they try to argue) over the past four years. More than half of the 26 terms assessed in both 2021 and 2025 are seen as less acceptable than four years ago. A majority of people now regard the blasphemy involving Jesus Christ and the F word as totally unacceptable, reversing a softening in attitude between 2018 and 2021.
Pacific peoples are the least accepting of strong language on air. Asian New Zealanders also have lower than average acceptance for general profanity.
Perhaps the BSA not only failed to enforce standards, but they also failed to read the room – and their own research.
So why is the BSA about to be dumped? Hopefully!
According to a report in The Centrist
The BSA’s credibility has come under renewed pressure after its recent decision that it did have jurisdiction over Sean Plunket’s The Platform, specifically its Live Talkback programme, while not asserting jurisdiction over overseas streaming giants such as Netflix, Apple TV, Prime Video, Disney+, YouTube, or personal livestreams by individuals.
The complaint against The Platform centred on Plunket describing tikanga Māori as “mumbo jumbo”.
Yes, the BSA are more concerned about the words “mumbo jumbo” than all that content that I just covered with you.
NZ First and Act want the BSA scrapped and Media and Communications Minister Paul Goldsmith has now agreed this is the most likely option.
According to the most recent BSA report, the BSA received just 90 complaints last year – because everybody has given up on them.
Of those 90 complaints – fewer than 100 formal complaints for the first time since 1990/91 – they upheld just 8.
Funding?
The Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) receives approximately $1 million per year in direct funding from the New Zealand government. As part of a longer-term funding boost, Labour’s 2022 budget committed an additional $1.2 million over four years to the BSA to ensure effective regulation – despite the fact that complaints were falling because the BSA is irrelevant.
They have eight staff – same as Family First. Actually we have 9 – some full, some part-time. And guess what. We don’t receive a cent from the Government. And wouldn’t take it.
But the hopefully good news is that it’s bye bye to the mumbo-jumbo BSA.
It’s a spectacular own goal by the BSA’s own thirst for unfettered power – typical of a government organisation, but it’s also a massive own goal to the serial complainer who I actually think should be awarded the Person of the Year 2026.
If it wasn’t for him, the BSA would still be up to their BS.
