BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

A baby being dangled out of a building window and boys riding on the roofs of trains

were two items previewed in a promo for Real TV broadcast on TV3 on 12 April at

8.48pm.

Ms Morton and Mr Gordon complained to TV3 that the promo advertised a

programme which contained "voyeuristic rubbish" and was offensive, and that it was

irresponsible to screen it during family viewing time.

In its response, TV3 acknowledged that the items themselves were unsuitable for

inclusion in the programme Real TV which is screened at 7.30pm, but maintained that

the content of the promo was permissible during AO time. It noted that the promos

were compiled prior to the programme being put together for the PGR timeslot in

which it was broadcast and that the content was not included in the final programme

because it was deemed to be unacceptable during PGR time. Dissatisfied with that

decision, Ms Morton and Mr Gordon referred their complaint to the Broadcasting

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

For the reasons given below, the Authority upholds the complaint that standard G2

was breached.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed the item complained about and have read

the correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). On this occasion, the Authority

determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

An episode of Real TV was previewed in a promo broadcast at 8.48pm on TV3 on 12

April 1997 and included footage of a baby being dangled out of an upstairs window, a

mid air incident involving parachutes, and boys riding on the roof of a train. The

promo advised that the Real TV programme would be broadcast the following evening

at 7.30pm.

Ms Morton and Mr Gordon expressed their shock at the promo being broadcast

during the commercial break of a comedy show, and their disbelief that the incidents

were being included in a 7.30pm show targeted at a family audience. They complained

that Real TV and its promo breached the standards relating to good taste and decency,

and argued that this type of programme should not be screened in prime time when

children were watching. The complainants stated that they were offended that TV3

condoned, and encouraged, the use of amateur video footage showing people doing

stupid, life threatening activities, and considered that it was irresponsible for the

programme to be broadcast, especially during family viewing time.

TV3 assessed the complaint under standards G2 and G12, nominated by the

complainants. They require 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.

G12   To be mindful of the effect any programme may have on children

during their normally accepted viewing times.

TV3 explained that the Real TV programme had been compiled from programmes

which screened around the world in various different time slots. The promo, made

from the original overseas material, was assembled before the New Zealand version of

the programme was compiled. Some of that material was deemed by TV3's

programmers to be unsuitable for the timeslot and, although it was included in the

promo, it was not in the programme which was broadcast the following evening.

TV3 pointed out that the promo which contained the unsuitable material was

broadcast during AO time, and argued that by placing it in adult time it had thus

demonstrated that it was mindful of children and had not contravened standard G12.

Next it assessed the complaint that standard G2 was breached. TV3 emphasised that

the programme showed footage of real life situations which, it argued, were dramatic

and compelling because they showed incidents as they actually happened. It repeated

that although some of the incidents were not suitable for broadcast in the 7.30pm

timeslot, when placed during AO time, there was no breach of standard G2.

The Authority focuses on two incidents in the promo – the footage of the baby being

dangled from an upstairs window, and the footage of boys riding on the roof of a train.

While it considers TV3 acted responsibly in deciding not to include these incidents in

the full programme which went to air the following evening, the Authority expresses

concern that they were selected for the promo. Both incidents sensationalised

perilous situations for those involved and, in the Authority's view, trivialised their

seriousness by reducing them to a mere amusement and entertainment. TV3 made a

conscious decision to put to air images which the Authority believes most people

would find unacceptable. Even though they were brief and relatively inexplicit, the

accompanying commentary ensured that viewers were apprised of the precise details

in what the Authority considered to be an exploitative and gratuitous manner. It finds

the content offensive and a breach of standard G2.

With respect to the complaint that the content was unsuitable for children, the

Authority accepts TV3's argument that the promo was broadcast during AO time and

that it was not intended for a younger audience. It believes that TV3 demonstrated

that it was mindful of children by placing the promo in Adult Only time. However, it

remains a breach of the good taste standard for the reasons given above, regardless of

the time of the broadcast. The Authority declines to uphold the standard G12 aspect

of the complaint.

For the reasons set forth above, the Authority upholds the complaint that the

broadcast by TV3 Network Services Ltd of a promo for Real TV on 12 April 1997

at 8.48pm breached standard G2 of the Television Code of Broadcasting

Practice.

Having upheld a complaint, the Authority may make an order under s.13(1) of the

Broadcasting Act 1989. It does not intend to do so on this occasion because of the

brevity of the promo and because TV3 demonstrated its awareness that the content

was unsuitable for general viewing by omitting the segments from the full programme.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
18 September 1997

Appendix

Suzanne Morton's and David Gordon's Complaint to TV3 Network Services

Ltd – 16 April 1997

Suzanne Morton and David Gordon of Wellington complained about the content of a

promo for the programme Real TV broadcast on TV3 on 12 April at about 8.48pm.

The promo showed scenes from the programme of real incidents including a baby

being dangled from a building window.

They considered it unbelievable that such a programme would be broadcast, let alone

on a Sunday night at 7.30pm. They described the programme as "voyeuristic

rubbish", adding that the broadcast of the promo spoiled their viewing of the comedy

show they were watching.

Ms Morton and Mr Gordon considered the programme and the promo breached

standards relating to good taste and decency, and that children should be protected

from that type of programme being screened in primetime.

In a second letter dated 15 May 1997, at TV3's request they clarified what it was

they considered offensive. They listed the following incidents:

• A baby being dangled from a building window by a man while screaming

people (the mother? etc) are looking out and are very distraught

• A parachute jump going wrong (presumably resulting in a few deaths)
  
  
• Boys riding on train roofs for a thrill, while the TV crew come along to

record the dangerous activity

The complainants added that it was not just these incidents which were offensive, but

that the whole concept of "Real TV" was offensive. By paying amateur camera

people to film such situations, they argued that TV3 was implying it was all right to

spy on hapless victims, and that it endorsed camera crews encouraging people to do

stupid, life-threatening things such as riding on train roofs.

They observed that the programme appealed to that part of human nature which

caused people to stop at road accidents or to dare other people to do dangerous things

for a thrill. They concluded:

But it is totally irresponsible to SCREEN a programme like "Real TV", and

particularly during family viewing time.

TV3's Response to the Formal Complaint – 21 May 1997

TV3 advised that the programme Real TV was made specifically for the 7.30pm

timeslot on TV3, having been compiled from programmes which screened all around

the world in different timeslots. As the programme itself was not completed in time

for the promo director to view the final product, TV3 explained that the promo was

made from the unedited material, some of which was unsuitable for the PGR timeslot.

However, TV3 maintained, the promo itself was acceptable to play in AO time, as

occurred on this occasion and therefore did not breach the standard which required it

to be mindful of the effect on children.

Turning to the complaint that it breached the good taste standard, TV3 repeated that

the promo contained pieces of AO footage which would never be shown during PGR

time, but because it was screened during AO time, it was not in breach of that

standard.

Ms Morton's and Mr Gordon's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards

Authority – 19 June 1997

Dissatisfied with TV3's decision not to uphold their complaint, Ms Morton and Mr

Gordon referred it to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the

Broadcasting Act 1989.

In their view the promo breached standard G2 of the Television Code of Broadcasting

Practice because it was offensive and disturbing and it did not matter what timeslot or

context it was shown in.

TV3's Response to the Authority – 21 July 1997

TV3 advised that it had no further comment to make.