New Zealanders see significant public interest in airing diverse views about gender identity but are concerned about the
potential for community harm, new BSA research finds.
While views are similar across ages and ethnicities, levels of concern over potential harm versus the right to freedom
of expression differ markedly according to people’s comfort levels with gender diversity.
Malicious intent and the risk of harm to vulnerable gender diverse communities are top-of-mind for ‘higher comfort New
Zealanders’.* ‘Lower comfort New Zealanders’ prioritise freedom of speech, and perceive a lack of a balanced discourse
which is not in the public interest.
The latest instalment in the BSA’s biennial ‘litmus testing’ survey was commissioned after the Authority saw an influx of complaints about TV and radio coverage of gender identity issues,
including last year’s New Zealand visit by Posie Parker.
The survey explores community attitudes towards these issues, and whether BSA decisions under the Discrimination and
Denigration, and Fairness broadcasting standards reflect these attitudes and are understood by the public.
An average of 91% of survey participants agreed with five BSA decisions that were tested.**
Key findings include:Participants feel gender identity issues are a ‘hot topic’ that can be exploited by broadcasters to gain viewers or
listeners.There is a strong sense New Zealanders must be ‘for’ or ‘against’ gender diverse people due to how this topic tends to
be framed.There is a consensus that there’s significant public interest in sharing diverse perspectives.Higher comfort New Zealanders believe it’s important for broadcasts to be respectful and inclusive, avoiding negative
stereotypes, and that discriminatory opinions about gender diverse people with malicious intent have no place being
broadcast.Lower comfort New Zealanders place high value on ensuring diverse perspectives can be shared, even when some may find
them discriminatory. They have a strong sense the discourse on TV and radio lacks balance, with more ‘liberal’
perspectives often favoured.Regardless of their view prior to reading BSA decisions, most people accept the reasoning, even when they don’t agree
with the outcome. Most find them clear and easy to understand.
BSA Chief Executive Stacey Wood says the results show broad agreement that respectful sharing of perspectives on TV and
radio can be beneficial to society.
“This must, however, be framed constructively to avoid unintentionally – or intentionally – harming viewers or
listeners. People are saying it’s not okay when an opinion is intentionally malicious.
“The BSA’s fundamental task is to balance freedom of expression against potential harm. Despite wide divergence in
people’s views and comfort levels around gender identity, there appears to be a broad-based appreciation of the
challenge we face and support for the BSA’s decision making.
“We welcome this assurance that our decisions reflect community standards and are generally getting the balance right,”
says Wood.
The full research report is available at: Litmus Testing 2024.