BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

DB Sport is the title of a weekly sports programme broadcast by CTV each Monday

between 9.00–10.00pm.

GOAL, through its spokesperson Mr Turner, complained to Canterbury Television

Ltd that the words DB Draught appeared on the screen so many times during the

broadcast on 18 April that the standard requiring the avoidance of the saturation of

liquor promotions was breached.

As CTV did not respond within the 60 working day time limit, GOAL referred the

complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(b) of the

Broadcasting Act 1989.

After the failure to respond was drawn to its attention, CTV advised that it upheld the

complaint and reported that the appearances of the DB logo had been removed from

the programme. Unsure as to what CTV's action amounted to and arguing that it was

probably insufficient in view of the extent of the present breach and past breaches,

GOAL referred the complaint to the Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Act.

For the reasons given below, the Authority agreed with CTV that the broadcast

breached the standard but also accepted that its actions were appropriate in the

circumstances and declined to uphold GOAL's complaint that the broadcaster's action

was insufficient.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed the programme complained about and

have read the correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). As is its practice, the

Authority has determined the complaint without a formal hearing.

GOAL complained to both the Advertising Standards Complaint Board (ASCB) and

CTV about CTV's broadcast of DB Sport at 9.00pm on 18 April. To the ASCB, it

alleged a breach of the Code for Advertising Liquor as the length of time during which

the sponsorship credits had been displayed on some occasions exceeded the

requirement in the rules that such displays be brief. To CTV, GOAL alleged that the

number of times the words "DB Draught" appeared on the screen contravened

standard A1 of the Programme Standards for the Promotion of Liquor. It states:

A1  Saturation of liquor promotions, separately or in combination, must be

avoided. In addition, liquor advertisements shall not be broadcast

consecutively in any one break.

Complaints made under the Programme Standards may be referred to the Broadcasting

Standards Authority within 20 working days should the complainant be dissatisfied

with the broadcaster's decision or after 60 working days of the date of the complaint

should the complainant not receive a reply.

Under the latter provision, GOAL complained to the Authority. When CTV was

approached by the Authority for its reasons for not responding, it apologised both to

GOAL and to the Authority for its oversight with respect to the saturation aspect of

the complaint. It added that that aspect of the complaint had been upheld and its

action was to remove the logos from the programme.

On being advised of CTV's decision and its action, GOAL then referred the complaint

to the Authority on the grounds of dissatisfaction with the broadcaster's actions. It

reported that it was unsure of what CTV's action amounted to but, nevertheless,

argued it was insufficient as the Authority had to date upheld five complaints about

DB Sport and, consequently, a penalty which was more than nominal should be

imposed. CTV explained to the Authority that the DB logo would no longer be

displayed when names or scoreboards were shown on the screen. CTV also provided

the Authority with a copy of a tape of DB Sport as broadcast on 22 August 1994 to

illustrate the effect of its action.

The Authority records that, as CTV acknowledged, it failed to respond to GOAL

within 60 working days. As noted above, GOAL complained to both the ASCB and

the broadcaster. The ASCB sought CTV's comments on the complaint that it had

received and CTV advised the Authority that it believed that it had complied with all

its obligations when the ASCB upheld the complaint that it was dealing with. It now

realised that the complaints were distinct matters and apologised for not replying

directly to GOAL on the complaint made under the Programme Standards. It was that

complaint which GOAL referred to the Authority. It was a complaint which CTV

said that it also upheld upon realising it had earlier failed to respond to it.

The Authority agreed with CTV on the saturation issue. Indeed, it considered that the

number of verbal references to and on screen displays of DB, DB Sport and DB

Draught during the one hour long programme was grossly excessive, especially given

the Authority's ruling in Decisions Nos: 151-155/93 that the saturation of liquor

promotions standard was breached in sports broadcasts when more than one liquor

promotion was broadcast every three minutes on average measured over the entire

programme. The Authority has not counted the precise number of references on this

occasion but stopped after reaching 25 (more than the allowable number) appearances

of the DB logo – which were usually in the top right-hand corner of the screen – when

the name of a person being interviewed was shown or the score of a game was

broadcast. The tape of the 22 August broadcast of DB Sport showed that these

appearances of the logo have been deleted.

When deciding whether CTV's action was sufficient in view of the nature of the

breach, the Authority was required to consider two differing submissions. On the one

hand, the elimination of the logos suggested a serious attempt by CTV to comply with

the standards. On the other hand, it could be said that such efforts only occurred after

a successful complaint and, as GOAL noted, five previous complaints against DB

Sport have been upheld by the Authority – most of them for breach of the saturation

provision either in standard A1 or its predecessor, standard 29 of the Television Code

of Broadcasting Practice. On two occasions (Decision No: 93/93 dated 9 August 1993

and No: 13/94 dated 5 April 1994) the Authority ordered CTV to broadcast a

statement although the second is subject to appeal yet to be resolved.

At this stage and taking into account CTV's apparent effort in recent months to

ensure that formal complaints are dealt with competently, the Authority decided on

balance to encourage CTV to build on its increasing professionalism, and not to

impose an order. At the same time, it was far from satisfied both at the time CTV

took to respond to the complaint and the length of the process which has elapsed to

ensure that DB Sport complies with the standards. Consequently, it believed that

CTV should be warned that should a further contravention of standard A1 occur with

regard to future broadcasts of DB Sport, it must expect the imposition of a serious

penalty.

For the reasons given above, the Authority agreed with CTV when it upheld

GOAL's complaint about saturation of liquor promotion contained in the

broadcast of DB Sport on 18 April 1994 but decided that CTV's action was

sufficient.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Iain Gallaway
Chairperson
September 1994

Appendix

GOAL's Formal Complaint to Canterbury Television Limited

In a letter dated 26 April 1994, GOAL complained to Canterbury Television Ltd

about the programme DB Sport which was broadcast at 9.00pm on 18 April 1994.

GOAL stated that the words DB Draught appeared on the screen so many times

during the broadcast that there was a breach of standard A1 of the Programme

Standards for the Promotion of Liquor.

GOAL's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority

In a letter dated 25 July 1994, GOAL referred the complaint to the Broadcasting

Standards Authority under s.8(1)(b) of the Broadcasting Act 1989 since the

broadcaster had not responded to the complaint within the statutory time limit of 60

working days.

CTV's Response to the Authority

As is its practice, the Authority advised the broadcaster of the referral. Its letter is

dated 26 July 1994 and CTV's reply, 29 July.

CTV stated that it had now written to GOAL explaining that the reason that it had not

responded to the complaint was because of an oversight on the part of its staff.

It also advised that it had upheld GOAL's complaint and had removed the logos from

the programme.

GOAL'S Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority

Unsure as to what CTV's action amounted to now that it had belatedly upheld the

complaint, GOAL referred the complaint to the Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Act

in a letter dated 7 August 1994.

Regardless of the specific action CTV had undertaken, GOAL argued that the

Authority should consider the complaint and impose an order.

GOAL maintained:

The Authority has upheld five complaints from GOAL about DB Sport and

has twice imposed a nominal penalty. I believe that strong action against CTV

is long overdue.

CTV's Response to the Authority

As the complaint had now been referred under s.8(1)(a), the Authority sought CTV's

response in a letter dated 8 August 1994. In its reply dated 10 August, CTV

explained that all the "keys had a DB Draught logo" attached to them. Now the logo

had been removed from "all programme keys and scoreboards". That information, it

advised, had been conveyed to the Advertising Standards Complaints Board (ASCB).

GOAL's Final Comment to the Authority

When asked if it wanted to comment on CTV's reply, in a letter dated 18 August

GOAL pointed out that CTV, which acknowledged that saturation was the issue,

should be aware in view of past complaints that saturation was not within the

ASCB's jurisdiction.