1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,360 Speaker 1: But let's talk about the Broadcasting Standards Authority. Because the 2 00:00:02,360 --> 00:00:05,960 Speaker 1: Broadcasting Standards Authority has released today it's semi regular list 3 00:00:06,000 --> 00:00:08,320 Speaker 1: of which swear words are the most unacceptable to hear 4 00:00:08,360 --> 00:00:10,119 Speaker 1: in broadcasting. We're not going to say the words do 5 00:00:10,200 --> 00:00:13,280 Speaker 1: not stress out. But there are some interesting trends here 6 00:00:13,280 --> 00:00:15,880 Speaker 1: to talk about, Like according to the report, kiwis are 7 00:00:15,920 --> 00:00:19,840 Speaker 1: actually becoming less tolerant of bad language and broadcasts, which 8 00:00:19,880 --> 00:00:22,440 Speaker 1: goes against the trend of the last few surveys. Now, 9 00:00:22,520 --> 00:00:25,720 Speaker 1: Lewis Tenant is a lecturer in communication studies at aut 10 00:00:25,880 --> 00:00:29,080 Speaker 1: and is with us. Now, Hey, Lewis, hi, Heather, I 11 00:00:29,160 --> 00:00:31,560 Speaker 1: found that fascinating. Did you find that fascinating that we're 12 00:00:31,560 --> 00:00:32,680 Speaker 1: becoming less tolerant. 13 00:00:34,520 --> 00:00:37,480 Speaker 2: Yeah, But as you say broadly, I think you said 14 00:00:37,479 --> 00:00:39,760 Speaker 2: of bad language or offensive language. 15 00:00:39,960 --> 00:00:41,480 Speaker 3: If you look at. 16 00:00:41,800 --> 00:00:47,440 Speaker 2: The the results with a bit more nuanced you can 17 00:00:47,520 --> 00:00:50,879 Speaker 2: say we're more intolerant. But it's actually more intolerance overall 18 00:00:51,080 --> 00:00:56,560 Speaker 2: for racial slurs and kind of loaded gendered language. But 19 00:00:56,840 --> 00:00:59,520 Speaker 2: the long term trend for kind of naughty words is 20 00:01:00,160 --> 00:01:04,520 Speaker 2: still more much more relaxed overall over the past few decades. 21 00:01:05,080 --> 00:01:10,399 Speaker 2: So I guess it's more now people thinking about intent 22 00:01:11,040 --> 00:01:13,120 Speaker 2: rather than kind of is that a rude word. 23 00:01:14,400 --> 00:01:18,240 Speaker 1: So there is one exception to what you just said, though, 24 00:01:18,280 --> 00:01:22,000 Speaker 1: which is that the blasphemy Jesus f Christ is now 25 00:01:22,040 --> 00:01:25,959 Speaker 1: totally unacceptable, going up fifty three percent, up from forty 26 00:01:26,000 --> 00:01:29,039 Speaker 1: six percent, which which is kind of against the trend 27 00:01:29,080 --> 00:01:32,120 Speaker 1: of the general stuff. Right, if you assume it's just 28 00:01:32,160 --> 00:01:34,560 Speaker 1: like gendered stuff and racial stuff, then this should not 29 00:01:34,640 --> 00:01:35,160 Speaker 1: be part of that. 30 00:01:36,959 --> 00:01:39,080 Speaker 3: Yeah, although you could argue that is. 31 00:01:40,880 --> 00:01:44,680 Speaker 2: As loaded and as seen as having intent for the 32 00:01:44,720 --> 00:01:48,320 Speaker 2: sector of the community that's Christian. And I think there 33 00:01:49,040 --> 00:01:52,120 Speaker 2: has been data that Christianity has been on the rise 34 00:01:52,360 --> 00:01:53,840 Speaker 2: in New Zealand in the past. 35 00:01:54,120 --> 00:01:54,760 Speaker 3: Decade or so. 36 00:01:54,840 --> 00:01:57,280 Speaker 2: I mean, that is a hypothesis on my part. Don't 37 00:01:57,280 --> 00:01:59,720 Speaker 2: have that data in front of me. The other similar 38 00:02:00,560 --> 00:02:03,480 Speaker 2: anomaly was that we've got to be careful here. I 39 00:02:03,480 --> 00:02:05,280 Speaker 2: thought about the topic. I could easily get dumped off 40 00:02:05,280 --> 00:02:12,120 Speaker 2: the air. But the F word andF we're counter to 41 00:02:12,320 --> 00:02:16,560 Speaker 2: what I originally said. But I wonder there whether it's 42 00:02:16,639 --> 00:02:21,960 Speaker 2: people recognizing that broadcast TV and broadcast radio are kind 43 00:02:22,000 --> 00:02:25,560 Speaker 2: of the last bastion of being able to safely have 44 00:02:25,800 --> 00:02:29,040 Speaker 2: your kids around or your granny around and not be 45 00:02:29,280 --> 00:02:31,240 Speaker 2: kind of hit with something you're not expecting. So in 46 00:02:31,240 --> 00:02:33,400 Speaker 2: other words, I wonder whether there's a kind of an 47 00:02:33,440 --> 00:02:35,760 Speaker 2: Internet fatigue setting in. We all know we can kind 48 00:02:35,760 --> 00:02:38,320 Speaker 2: of see and hear everything there and it's kind of 49 00:02:38,400 --> 00:02:42,000 Speaker 2: lawless in terms of legislation. So I wonder whether that's 50 00:02:42,080 --> 00:02:44,680 Speaker 2: where that trends changed a bit, where people are getting 51 00:02:44,680 --> 00:02:44,959 Speaker 2: a bit. 52 00:02:45,639 --> 00:02:47,840 Speaker 1: Yeah, you know that you can turn the radio on 53 00:02:47,960 --> 00:02:50,160 Speaker 1: in the car and generally you can have the kids 54 00:02:50,200 --> 00:02:52,600 Speaker 1: in there and you know nothing bad is going to 55 00:02:52,600 --> 00:02:54,919 Speaker 1: be said. That's a fair point question for you. Why 56 00:02:55,040 --> 00:03:00,240 Speaker 1: is it that gypped and gypsy are rising in offensiveness? 57 00:03:01,040 --> 00:03:01,239 Speaker 3: Yeah? 58 00:03:01,240 --> 00:03:04,200 Speaker 2: I found that odd at first too, and that they're 59 00:03:04,200 --> 00:03:06,840 Speaker 2: not really terms we use there and we don't have 60 00:03:07,120 --> 00:03:10,440 Speaker 2: a assuming it refers to Romani community. 61 00:03:10,800 --> 00:03:13,360 Speaker 3: But when I looked into it a bit. 62 00:03:13,200 --> 00:03:18,240 Speaker 2: More, the survey says they removed five words from the 63 00:03:18,280 --> 00:03:22,120 Speaker 2: last one and added five new ones to ensure relevance. 64 00:03:22,200 --> 00:03:25,519 Speaker 2: So for the listeners who don't know gypsy and gypped 65 00:03:25,600 --> 00:03:28,600 Speaker 2: were added up until today, I didn't know being gypped 66 00:03:28,680 --> 00:03:30,200 Speaker 2: was related to the term gypsy. 67 00:03:29,840 --> 00:03:31,560 Speaker 3: But it makes total sense. 68 00:03:32,040 --> 00:03:36,360 Speaker 2: So my educated guests would be they're kind of refreshing 69 00:03:36,360 --> 00:03:42,920 Speaker 2: the bucket with some globally recognized derogatory terms, just to 70 00:03:43,320 --> 00:03:46,000 Speaker 2: kind of test the water in a way. 71 00:03:46,480 --> 00:03:49,960 Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, and then because okay, that doesn't feel very 72 00:03:50,040 --> 00:03:52,120 Speaker 1: organic to me, because those are not words that I 73 00:03:52,120 --> 00:03:54,960 Speaker 1: would consider in New Zealand that we find particularly offensive 74 00:03:54,960 --> 00:03:57,480 Speaker 1: because we don't actually have gypsy communities here, right, or 75 00:03:57,520 --> 00:04:00,160 Speaker 1: what people would consider gypsy communities. So is this a 76 00:04:00,160 --> 00:04:01,600 Speaker 1: little bit of a case of and I think it 77 00:04:01,640 --> 00:04:03,360 Speaker 1: was some it was really low level stuff. Is like 78 00:04:03,400 --> 00:04:05,840 Speaker 1: twenty percent of people found one of those words offensive? 79 00:04:06,080 --> 00:04:08,000 Speaker 1: So are those just twenty percent of people who go 80 00:04:08,440 --> 00:04:10,440 Speaker 1: it's on the list of offensive words I should probably 81 00:04:10,440 --> 00:04:10,920 Speaker 1: take yes. 82 00:04:12,560 --> 00:04:15,280 Speaker 2: Yeah, So just to quickly so what I was meaning 83 00:04:15,400 --> 00:04:17,880 Speaker 2: previously is yet I see as a kind of test word, 84 00:04:17,960 --> 00:04:20,000 Speaker 2: and it relates to how you just responded, like to 85 00:04:20,080 --> 00:04:23,719 Speaker 2: audience even recognize this word as derogatory. I think that's 86 00:04:24,080 --> 00:04:26,640 Speaker 2: what the kind of get getting a sense off and 87 00:04:26,680 --> 00:04:28,840 Speaker 2: to your to your to your question, I sort of 88 00:04:28,839 --> 00:04:31,320 Speaker 2: thought about filling any filling out any surveying. You know, 89 00:04:31,400 --> 00:04:33,160 Speaker 2: you ever got to the like, you know, what do 90 00:04:33,200 --> 00:04:34,680 Speaker 2: you think about this? Strongly agree? 91 00:04:34,760 --> 00:04:35,080 Speaker 3: Agree? 92 00:04:35,120 --> 00:04:37,120 Speaker 2: And I think maybe you get to that point and 93 00:04:37,160 --> 00:04:39,680 Speaker 2: just sort of choose one, you know. 94 00:04:39,920 --> 00:04:42,760 Speaker 1: Just agree because you're supposed to. Hey, do you collesee 95 00:04:42,800 --> 00:04:44,960 Speaker 1: a world? I mean, like it was quite a shock 96 00:04:45,080 --> 00:04:47,760 Speaker 1: last year to have the sea bomb dropped in Andrea 97 00:04:47,800 --> 00:04:50,160 Speaker 1: of ANSWER's column for The Post. Do you ever foresee 98 00:04:50,200 --> 00:04:54,440 Speaker 1: a world where we where we do actually say the 99 00:04:54,560 --> 00:04:56,280 Speaker 1: F word or the sea word on air and no 100 00:04:56,320 --> 00:04:57,520 Speaker 1: one even cares? 101 00:04:59,080 --> 00:05:03,919 Speaker 2: Well, that's kind of coming back to online content, like 102 00:05:04,040 --> 00:05:08,280 Speaker 2: we hear it all the time on video podcasts and 103 00:05:08,279 --> 00:05:13,039 Speaker 2: and podcasts in general and YouTube videos. Will we ever 104 00:05:13,080 --> 00:05:17,039 Speaker 2: see it in broadcasts? Do you mean as a term? Yeah, 105 00:05:17,080 --> 00:05:20,599 Speaker 2: I mean I think again it comes down. I can't 106 00:05:20,600 --> 00:05:22,880 Speaker 2: see it anytime soon because just as a word, like 107 00:05:22,920 --> 00:05:25,360 Speaker 2: even phonetically, it's sort of power. 108 00:05:25,440 --> 00:05:26,880 Speaker 3: It's obviously loaded around gender. 109 00:05:26,880 --> 00:05:30,760 Speaker 2: But also I think it's all about intent again, like 110 00:05:31,000 --> 00:05:36,320 Speaker 2: the way it was used in that article was really aggressive, 111 00:05:36,480 --> 00:05:39,360 Speaker 2: and to give you an example, like we also think 112 00:05:39,360 --> 00:05:42,440 Speaker 2: about our Australian friends who interchange that word with cobber. 113 00:05:42,520 --> 00:05:44,480 Speaker 2: You know, I'm quite happy to be called in that 114 00:05:44,520 --> 00:05:47,320 Speaker 2: context when I lived in Australia. But then you look 115 00:05:47,360 --> 00:05:50,760 Speaker 2: at like when Trump called that reporter piggy. To me, 116 00:05:50,960 --> 00:05:53,920 Speaker 2: that was pretty hard to hear and watch, So it 117 00:05:53,960 --> 00:05:56,560 Speaker 2: wasn't so much the letters of the word, you know, 118 00:05:56,720 --> 00:05:59,120 Speaker 2: as in with the C word, But it was how 119 00:05:59,160 --> 00:06:03,200 Speaker 2: it was said. And yeah, it's all about intent. But no, 120 00:06:03,360 --> 00:06:06,159 Speaker 2: I can't see a world where you're dropping sea bonds 121 00:06:06,200 --> 00:06:09,679 Speaker 2: every second voice break in the next future. 122 00:06:09,720 --> 00:06:12,279 Speaker 1: We're all happy about that, Lewis. Thanks very much, mate, 123 00:06:12,320 --> 00:06:15,279 Speaker 1: you're even a delight to talk to. Lewis Tennant, lecturer 124 00:06:15,279 --> 00:06:19,080 Speaker 1: and Communication Studies at aut For more from Heather Duplessy, 125 00:06:19,120 --> 00:06:21,960 Speaker 1: Allen Drive, listen live to news talks. It'd be from 126 00:06:22,000 --> 00:06:25,640 Speaker 1: four pm weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.