Laws' Maori smoking comments unfair - BSA

Comments made by Radio Live talkback host Michael Laws while discussing Maori smoking have been deemed unfair by the Broadcasting Standards Authority.

In a decision issued today the authority said its finding should remind broadcasters to deal fairly with people referred to in programmes.

Counties Manukau District Health Board employee Boyd Broughton had complained about comments Laws made after Mr Broughton emailed him about Maori smoking.

During the September 24 broadcast, Laws said that it was clear from Mr Broughton's emails that, "he regarded the cause of Maori smoking to essentially be white genocidal cigarette companies out to basically kill Maori".

Mr Broughton complained that Laws' comments did not accurately reflect his emails, he was not told he would be referred to in the programme and that disclosing his first name and workplace had breached his privacy.

But the authority found that as an employee of a district health board Mr Broughton did not have a reasonable expectation that his name or occupation would be withheld.

It found that Mr Broughton had willingly engaged in a provocative exchange with a well-known politician and media personality and he could not reasonably expect his emails would remain private, despite carrying a confidentiality disclaimer in te reo Maori.

The decision said it was not necessary, in the interests of fairness, to alert Mr Broughton that he would be referred to in the broadcast because his views on the general topic were not required.

"In the authority's view, Mr Laws' references to the complainant were incidental to the programme, which discussed several topics over three hours," the decision said.

However, the authority upheld the complaint that Laws unfairly represented Mr Broughton's views.

Mr Broughton had said that "Pakeha continue to allow [smoking] in the country and make profits from it', but Laws told his listeners that Mr Broughton believed, and told his clients, that smoking is a "Pakeha plot to kill Maori', an assertion he made several times during the course of his programme.

"The authority is firm in its view that such blatant misrepresentation cannot be regarded as `fair comment', as argued by the broadcaster," the decision said.

The authority considered whether upholding the complaint would infringe on the broadcaster's freedom of expression, but decided its decision would remind broadcasters to ensure they dealt with people referred to in a programme fairly.

It did not make any orders in relation to the complaint, as publication of the decision was sufficient.

- NZPA