Posts by George Darroch
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Slightly OT, but on the subject of Government accountability... how about the NZ Government lying to get a full law passed through all stages in less than an hour?
This Government is making democracy into a farce.
-
Predictably, Danyl McLauchlan is being contrarian.
-
Oh come on Hilary ! You're not seriously expecting the editors and reporters at TVNZ and the Herald to know the difference between a median and a mean, are you?
-
"Clean green NZ".
"100% pure".What kind of people are we (well not us ) that we allow things like this to happen? Did we suddenly time-warp to 1980?
Thanks David, for helping us oppose this.
-
so broadcasting sexist, insulting, ridicule is ok...?
No, those things are covered by section 6 f and 6 g of the code.
-
Oh wait, that's Nanny State huh? How's about we just subtly gesticulate this in a suggestive manner then?
Even that's too much for the current bunch of idiots. Hug a polar bear!
Cause having the Government actually do something about climate change is wrong. Just plain wrong! Wrong! Shouldn't be spending our money on something as irrelevant as the future of the planet. Political correctness gone mad!
They're shiteating fucknuts, to quote Keith.
-
is this programme subject to a lower set of standards under the regulations? (versus other news and current affairs/interview programmes. etc.)
Section 1 (good taste and decency) relates to ratings (PG, AO, etc.). You'd have to argue that it was content that was inappropriate for a child to be watching.
There's nothing in the standards that means that good taste and decency actually have to be followed. Which is a good thing, after all, as your good taste and mine are not identical. Eating Media Lunch would never have made it past one program if the law was enforced in the way you're thinking of.
-
Just about to send in the complaint - need the time of broadcast though...
-
Graeme's right, 6f is the most relevant:
Broadcasters should recognise the rights of individuals, and particularly children and young people, not to be exploited, humiliated or unnecessarily identified.
-
Not that I think that facial hair is a disability, but Paul Fucking Henry was treating it as one, and one worthy of ridicule so I think that's worth mentioning too.