BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

Body piercing generally and nipple piercing in particular were discussed in an item on

Channel Two's Newsnight broadcast at about 10.30pm on 24 August 1994.

Mr England complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, that the item

was presented in a sensational manner to titillate. Accordingly, it breached the

standard requiring good taste and decency.

Pointing out that the audience for Newsnight were mature young adults who expected

to be informed of trends in an interesting and informative manner, and that the item

complied with these requirements, TVNZ declined to uphold the complaint.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's decision, Mr England referred the complaint to the

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

For the reasons given below, the Authority declined to uphold the complaint.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed the item 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.

Skin piercing was dealt with in an item on Newsnight on 24 August. The item

reported that among the parts of the body which were pierced – in both males and

females – were navels, noses and nipples. The programme showed the breasts of two

women with pierced nipples.

Mr England complained that the broadcast breached the standard requiring the

observance of good taste and decency. He maintained that the shots of the breasts of

the two women were designed to shock and titillate viewers.

TVNZ assessed the complaint under standard G2 of the Television Code of

Broadcasting Practice which requires broadcasters:

G2  To take into consideration currently accepted norms of decency and taste

in language and behaviour, bearing in mind the context in which any

language or behaviour occurs.

Arguing that body piercing was a growing practice, TVNZ denied that the shots were

intended to shock or titillate, or that the exposure of the breasts was gratuitous. It

said that the item, at nearly 10.30pm, dealt with one of the newer trends in a neutral

manner.

Although the item shown was about a practice which some would regard as strange,

the Authority took into account the hour of the broadcast and the factual manner in

which the material had been reported and declined to uphold the complaint. It did not

agree that the item either shocked or titillated and believed that TVNZ had observed,

in context, currently accepted norms of decency and taste.

For the above reasons, the Authority declines to uphold the complaint.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Iain Gallaway
Chairperson
3 November 1994

Appendix

Mr England's Formal Complaint to Television New Zealand Limited - 25

August 1994

Mr R J England of Wellington complained to Television New Zealand Ltd about an

item broadcast on Channel Two's Newsnight on 24 August which, he said,

contravened the standard requiring good taste and decency.

Explaining that the item had dealt with the skin piercing, and with nipple piercing in

particular, he argued that the item was designed to titillate by focussing on women's

breasts. One woman showed both her breasts and another, he wrote, was walking in a

park when asked to show her pierced nipple.

Mr England argued that the broadcast breached the standard requiring good taste as "a

more neutral method" could have been employed to convey the information.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint - 6 September 1994

TVNZ advised that the complaint had been assessed by its Complaints Committee

under standard G2 of the Television Code.

TVNZ reported:

"Eyewitness" is aimed largely at viewers under 40. One of the aims of the

programme is to inform and explain current trends to a mature young audience

in a manner which is attractive and explanatory.

Body piercing is without a doubt a growing trend among many young people

today. Instead of being confined just to the nose and ears some people are

going much further and the item sought to report on that trend. The very

nature of the subject led to shots of the more intimate parts of the body.

Explaining that nipple piercing was one of the newer trends, TVNZ maintained that

the exposure of breasts was not gratuitous. The shot in the park was swift and part of

a natural sequence and conversation. As the item was shown late in the evening, and

was tastefully edited, TVNZ said that it would not have offended the target audience

and that the standard requiring good taste had not been breached.

Mr England's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 9 September

1994

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Mr England referred the complaint to the

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

Accepting that TVNZ might believe that the item was of good quality, Mr England

expressed his displeasure that it showed a behaviour - flashing breasts - which was

unacceptable to the public.

He explained that his objection was not based on prudery but because the item was

"sensationalist rubbish" which was "cheap" and "nasty".

Stating that TVNZ's programming standards should not be allowed to decline further,

he said the Authority must impose a worthwhile penalty or be dismissed as

ineffective.

TVNZ's Response to the Authority - 19 September 1994

When asked to comment on the referral, TVNZ said that the item had dealt with the

growing trend among young people toward body piercing.

Emphasising the requirement in the good taste standard that context had to be taken

into account, TVNZ said that Eyewitness was designed for the mature but younger

audience, who would have been interested in the item. It also pointed to the fact that

the item did not screen until about 10.30pm and argued that, in context, the standard

had not been contravened.

Mr England's Final Comment to the Authority - 22 September 1994

When asked for a brief comment on TVNZ's reply, Mr England argued that

broadcasters - not viewers - decided what was interesting. However, his complaint

was not about TVNZ dictating what people should be interested in but, rather, in the

"sheer grossness" of the item broadcast on this occasion. It was designed to titillate,

he maintained and was "garbage tabloid" journalism.

Referring to the many police shows on television, he asked what was acceptable as the

standards of programming declined. He urged the Authority to stop TVNZ from

broadcasting sensational rubbish for which, he added, many New Zealanders would be

grateful.