New Zealand audiences have become less tolerant of offensive language over the past four years, partially reversing a long-term trend towards greater acceptance, according to a new survey from the Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA).
The regulator's latest survey on attitudes to offensive language in broadcasting shows racial slurs and terms targeting specific communities remain at the top of the least acceptable of the 31 words tested.
Several terms have also seen sharp increases in unacceptability, including the C-word, which drew public attention last year after being used in Parliament by Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden.
Van Velden used the c-word in reference to a Sunday Star Times' column by Andrea Vance, which later went on to win Massey University's Quote of the Year.
BSA chief executive Stacey Wood said the survey findings reflected a shift in how harm was perceived.
"While regular 'swear words' may raise fewer eyebrows than they once did, New Zealanders increasingly object to expressions grounded in racism, misogyny, or denigration of particular groups."
Longer-term trends still point to a softening towards words once considered obscene "just for the sake of it", Wood told Nights.
"I think a lot of people are pretty immune to the f-word now in a lot of contexts, but there are still words that you might say around your mates or when you stub your toe that you wouldn’t say in front of your nana."
The research, conducted regularly since 1999, helps guide the decision-making on good taste and decency standards under the Broadcasting Act 1989, which broadcasters need to adhere to.
This year, five words were removed from the survey and replaced with another four racial or ethnic slurs and one term targeting people with disabilities.
What did the various demographics find offensive?
The latest survey was completed in September last year by 1501 respondents. Most were Auckland-based, aged 40–59, of European descent, had a household income of more than $100,000 a year, and reported no religious affiliation.
Fifteen percent identified as Māori, 7 percent as Pasifika, and 17 percent as Asian.
Overall, Pacific peoples, women — particularly older women — and Christians were the least accepting of offensive language in broadcasting. Pacific respondents rated several lower-ranked terms as significantly more unacceptable than the national average.
Compared with New Zealand Europeans and Asian respondents, Māori found terms such as "curry muncher", "r****d" and "coconut" especially unacceptable. Asian New Zealanders were less accepting of a range of words, largely general profanity.
Young people aged 18–29 generally aligned with national averages, though young women were less accepting than young men of the top seven offensive words, with a gap of at least 10 percentage points for each of these words. On the other hand, young men were less accepting of "a******e" than young women.
How does context matter?
As with previous survey findings, context also plays a major role. Respondents were more sensitive to offensive language when presenters spoke directly to audiences, and in programmes broadcast before the 8.30pm watershed, when children are more likely to be watching or listening. (Although only 27 percent of respondents were caring for children aged 14 and under.)
Tolerance was higher for scripted entertainment and comedy, and has softened considerably for reality television over the past four years — a shift the BSA attributes to increased exposure to international formats through streaming services. Music videos were among the most tolerated formats.
Six in 10 respondents saw no difference in how acceptable potentially offensive language is on pay TV versus free-to-air.
Attitudes towards the use of the word “mental” have also become more permissive across all formats.
*The findings have a margin of error of +/-2.5% at the 95 percent confidence level.
