BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

America Ninja 3: Blood Hunt was screened on TV2 at 8.30pm on 18 March.

Mr Turner complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, that the large

amount of gratuitous violence in the film breached the broadcasting standards.

Pointing out the film was classified as "AO" and preceded with a warning, TVNZ said

that the action contained in the film – martial arts type kick-boxing – was a legitimate

activity and, in that context, the violence was not gratuitous. It declined to uphold the

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

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

For the reasons 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.

Mr Turner complained to TVNZ that American Ninja 3: Blood Hunt, screened on

TV2 at 8.30pm on 18 March, involved the gratuitous use of violence in contravention

of the standards. He noted that the film had been described as "kick-boxing trash" in

the "Listener".

TVNZ assessed the complaint under standard V2 of the Television Code of

Broadcasting Practice which reads:

V2 When obviously designed for gratuitous use to achieve heightened impact,

realistic violence – as distinct from farcical violence – must be avoided.

Screening the film with a warning about violence and with an "AO" classification in an

"AO" timeslot, TVNZ argued, did not breach the standards. It explained that most of

the violence was of a martial arts variety which was recognised internationally as a

legitimate brand of self-defence. Moreover, it reported, five sequences had been

deleted before screening to avoid any suggestion that the violence was gratuitous.

When he referred his complaint to the Authority, Mr Turner pointed to the violence

in a scene in which a man lying beside his car was kicked and, he argued, the kicking

was not connected with martial arts and was entirely gratuitous. Warnings and the use

of an "AO" time-slot, Mr Turner maintained, did not exempt a broadcast from the

standard V2 requirement not to use gratuitous violence for the purposes of heightened

impact.

In its report to the Authority, TVNZ argued that the specific scene referred to – which

had not been mentioned in the original complaint – was neither gratuitous nor

irrelevant within the context of the entire film.

Mr Turner had argued that people below the age of 18 years could be watching after

8.30pm and, in response, TVNZ agreed that that might happen but when it had

classified programmes, it believed that the responsibility rested with parents and

caregivers as to what they allowed young people to watch. TVNZ said that it had

met its responsibility by advertising the classification and preceding the broadcast of

American Ninja 3 in "AO" time with a warning.

"AO" programmes can be broadcast between 8.30pm–5.00am and from 12.00 noon–

3.00pm on weekdays (other than school or public holidays). Because of its decision

on this complaint (and the complaints determined recently in Decision Nos: 40/95,

41/95 and 42/95) the Authority considered that the question of an appropriate hour

for the watershed should be deferred pending a decision on a complaint where the

watershed is the crux of the decision.

The Authority noted that the film American Ninja 3 was one of the genre which

displayed martial arts. It would also note that it was questionable to maintain, as

TVNZ had done, that the martial arts had been confined to defence. Part of the film,

the Authority observed, involved revenge.

Nevertheless, taking into account both the specific scene complained about – the

kicking of the person on the ground – and the film overall, the Authority did not

believe that standard V2 had been breached. It observed that the theme of the film

was the demonstration of the martial art of kick-boxing and, in that context, it

accepted that displays of kick-boxing were not gratuitous and thus the standard had

not been contravened.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Iain Gallaway
15 June 1995

Appendix

Mr Turner's Complaint to Television New Zealand Limited - 20 March 1995

Mr Cliff Turner of Hamilton complained to Television New Zealand Limited about

the broadcast of the film American Ninja 3: Blood Hunt shown on TV2 on 18 March

8.30pm.

Commenting that he was not sure whether his copy of the codes was the latest

edition, Mr Turner contended that, as the film appeared to have crammed the

maximum amount of violence into it, it had breached standard 22 of the codes which

states:

The gratuitous use of violence for the purpose of heightened impact is to be

avoided.

Mr Turner commented that it had been interesting to note that the Listener had

described the film as "kick-boxing" trash.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint - 26 April 1995

Apologising for its delay in responding as it had been necessary to allow time for

committee members to view the film, TVNZ advised Mr Turner that it had assessed

the complaint under standard V2 of the Television Programme Standards.

TVNZ believed that the important factors to be considered were the time of the

broadcast and the nature of the action contained in the film.

Because the film was shown at 8.30pm with an "AO" classification, TVNZ said that

it was clearly informing viewers that the film was adult entertainment and not suitable

for people under the age of 18.

TVNZ also maintained that the nature of the action was made clear at the beginning of

the film as the warning broadcast stated:

American Ninja 3 is a martial arts movie containing violence and scenes some

viewers may find disturbing. We advise discretion.

Noting that most of the "violence" in the film was of a kick-boxing or martial arts

type, TVNZ said that it could not take exception to this particular brand of self-

defence as it was recognised internationally as a legitimate activity.

On the question of whether the violent action was gratuitous, TVNZ argued that the

martial arts activity was in a different category to other types of screen violence as

more of it had to be shown to demonstrate the skills involved - rather, it said, like

fencing. As martial arts were the central theme and the purpose of the film was to

extol the virtue of this activity, TVNZ maintained the violence was not gratuitous.

Moreover, TVNZ told Mr Turner, five sequences had been deleted from the film

before it was shown in order to avoid any suggestion that the action was gratuitous.

In conclusion, TVNZ said that it was sorry that Mr Turner had found fault with the

film but believed that standard V2 had not been breached.

Mr Turner's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 3 May 1995

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

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

Mr Turner asked the Authority to pay particular attention to a scene in which a man

lying beside a car was violently kicked. Mr Turner believed that the kicking was

entirely gratuitous and had no connection with martial arts. Although there were other

violent scenes, Mr Turner wrote, this was the one which had prompted him to make

the complaint.

TVNZ had defended the showing of the film by saying that it was rated "AO" and

that a warning had been given before the film was shown but, Mr Turner argued, the

rule said that gratuitous violence was unacceptable not that it could be shown in "AO"

time or if a warning was given.

Referring to TVNZ's admission that five cuts had been made to the film and that the

Listener had described the film as trash, Mr Turner said that it would have been better

to have left the film in the trash can.

As the "AO" rating meant that the film was not suitable for people under the age of

18, Mr Turner asked whether TVNZ seriously believed that young people in the 15

to 17 age bracket stopped watching television at 8.30pm on a Saturday evening. The

word Ninja had connotations which he believed would have encouraged many

teenagers to watch the film.

Mr Turner reminded the Authority that on a past occasion he had queried the removal

of a statement from the old rules which in effect had said that violence could only be

justified when it sharpened human sensitivities. He had been assured that the new

rules would have the same effect but claimed that if this assertion had been correct, his

complaint would have succeeded.

TVNZ's Response to the Authority - 10 May 1995

In its report to the Authority, TVNZ first referred to the specific incident Mr Turner

regarded as gratuitously violent. TVNZ suggested that taken in isolation an individual

scene might seem irrelevant and could appear as gratuitous to the subjective viewer

but it believed in this case that the scene contributed to the atmosphere of the film and

to the development of the characters. It observed that Mr Turner did not mention the

incident in his original letter of complaint.

In reply to Mr Turner's conclusion that the film was trash, TVNZ said, first, that the

excising of material from programmes to meet programme standards was standard

practice and that five cuts from a feature-length movie were unremarkable. Secondly,

by labelling the film "trash", Mr Turner had indicated a preference for films of a

different type and quality. But, TVNZ pointed out, s.5(c) of the Broadcasting Act

states that "complaints based merely on a complainant's preference are not, in general,

capable of being resolved by a complaints procedure".

Acknowledging that, of course, it did not believe that people in the 15 -17 age bracket

stopped watching television at 8.30pm, TVNZ claimed that if it followed that

argument to its logical conclusion it would not screen adult entertainment at any time

of the evening unsuitable for children and thus the Television Programme

Classifications would become meaningless.

TVNZ suggested that a contract existed between broadcasters and viewers, and that

TVNZ's responsibility was to classify programmes for viewers information and place

these programmes in appropriate time-slots. The responsibility of whether or not to

allow children to watch "AO" movies rested with parents and care-givers. In the case

of American Ninja 3, TVNZ had displayed the "AO" certificate and provided a

warning.

TVNZ finally observed that many "quality" British programmes also with "AO"

certificates were watched by people younger than 18 years of age with full parental

approval but TVNZ had played its part by indicating that these programmes should

be confined to viewers aged 18 years and over. It also commented that although

America Ninja 3 clearly fell into the entertainment category, a number of programmes

that provided more intellectual stimulus had "AO" certificates such as programmes

written by Dennis Potter and the series Seaforth.

Mr Turner's Final Comment -18 May 1995

Mr Turner advised that he did not wish to comment further.