BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

Illegal drag racing on the streets in and near Oamaru was dealt with in an item on

Police Stop!, broadcast by TV3 at 7.30pm on 16 September 1997.

Ms Mickleson complained to the broadcaster, TV3 Network Services Ltd, that the

item was highly offensive in suggesting that all drag racers were hoons burning

rubber on the streets. The sport of drag racing, she said, was organised and skilful,

and, she asserted, the number one spectator sport in Australia and America.

Explaining that the focus of the item was on how illegal drag racing had been stamped

out on the streets of Oamaru, and that the term "drag racing" was used in the way

accepted by most New Zealanders, TV3 declined to uphold the complaint.

Dissatisfied with TV3's decision, Ms Mickleson referred her complaint to the

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

For the reasons below, the Authority declines 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). On this occasion, the Authority

determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

An item broadcast on Police Stop! on 16 September 1997 was introduced by the

presenter with a reference to "drag racing". It dealt with the behaviour of some young

people in Oamaru and showed them in cars on town and country roads deliberately

accelerating and burning out the cars tyres. During the item, the activity was

described as illegal street racing, and the drivers were called "boy racers". The film

of the events which was screened was said to be shot by an amateur, who was

apparently one of the participants in the activities.

Ms Mickleson complained that the use of the term "drag racing" in an item which

showed "hoons . . .  burning rubber and driving in circles", reflected adversely on the

official sport of drag racing.

TV3 assessed the complaint under standard G13 of the Television Code of

Broadcasting Practice, which requires broadcasters:

G13  To avoid portraying people in a way which represents as inherently

inferior, or is likely to encourage discrimination against, any section of the

community on account of race, age, disability, occupational status, sexual

orientation or the holding of any religious, cultural or political belief.

This requirement is not intended to prevent the broadcast of material

which is:

i) factual, or

ii) the expression of genuinely-held opinion in a news or current affairs

programme, or

iii) in the legitimate context of a humorous, satirical or dramatic work.

On the basis that the dictionary definition of "drag racing" was an "acceleration race

between cars over a short distance", TV3 did not accept the item denigrated the

participants in official drag racing. Moreover, it said, the item had referred to illegal

drag racers.

As part of its determination of this complaint, the Authority has referred to Decision

No: 158/95 (19 December 1995) which determined a complaint about an issue similar

to that raised by Ms Mickleson. In that decision, the Authority dealt with a complaint

about an item which described illegal street racing in South Auckland as "drags".

Moreover, there was no attempt made to draw a distinction between the activity

shown and the legitimate sport of drag racing, other than to acknowledge that the

street racing portrayed was illegal. The Authority considered that complaint under

standards G1, G6, and G13, and wrote on that occasion:

Because the people interviewed represented their activities as drag racing, it was

inevitable that many viewers would draw the conclusion that there was a link

between the matters portrayed in the item and the legitimate sport.

Accordingly, because of the probability that the linkage would be made, the

majority upheld the complaint [under standard G1] that the portrayal of the

activities shown as drag racing was inaccurate.

A majority also upheld the complaint that the item was unbalanced and in breach of

standard G6. As for standard G13, the Authority recorded:

The Authority rejected the complaint under standard G13 that the item treated

drag racers as inferior or discriminated against them. It did not believe that the

item would have encouraged viewers to regard drag racers as inferior or to

discriminate against them. It considered the complainant's concern – that the

item dealt with drag racers unfairly – was dealt with under standard G6

considered above.

The situation with regard to the current complaint is clearly distinguishable from that

in No: 158/95. Apart from one reference to the phrase "drag racing", the Police Stop!

item emphasised the illegality of the activity portrayed. The item reported the efforts

made by the Police to halt the illegal street racing and, at one point, showed the Police

arriving, and apprehending, the participants of one gathering where the illegal

behaviour portrayed was taking place.

The Authority also records that it does not accept that the New Zealand Drag Racing

Association has proprietary rights over the term "drag racing". As a parallel, it notes

for example a reference to "horse racing" may mean a meeting at an official

racecourse, or the action of a group of horse riders on a beach.

The Authority wants to deal with a misapprehension which the complainant appeared

to have, when she criticised the programme makers for filming, but not preventing,

the dangerous and illegal activities. This was an understandable misapprehension at

the beginning of the item, but as the item revealed, the lack of the camera-operator's

skills was apparent and, towards the end, there was reference to the amateur nature of

the film which was screened.

While the Authority understands the complainant's concern at the initial use of the

term "drag racing" in view of the difficulty the sport experiences in obtaining

sponsorship, it does not accept that the full item suggested that the activities portrayed

were in fact "drag racing". There were both visual and verbal references to the illegal

nature of the activities screened, and, the Authority concludes, it was not implied in

the item that legitimate drag racing consisted of hoons burning rubber.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
15 December 1997

Appendix

Ms Mickleson's Complaint to TV3 Network Services Ltd v 17 September 1997

Cathy Mickleson of Auckland complained to TV3 Network Services about an item on

Police Stop!, broadcast at 7.30pm on 16 September 1997 by TV3.

The item had dealt with drag racing and Ms Mickleson said that the presenter's (Peter

Brock) off-hand use of the term was highly offensive. She noted that a specific

definition of the term "Drag Racing" existed in the rule book of the New Zealand

Drag Racing Association, but its use by the presenter on Police Stop! suggested

incorrectly that all drag racers were hoons burning rubber on the streets of the

country. Moreover, she continued, the sport of drag racing had been and continued to

be damaged by such irresponsible journalism.

Ms Mickleson noted that she was currently the fastest female drag racer in New

Zealand However, sponsorship was very difficult to obtain apparently because of the

sport's media image.

In addition, she asked why the presenter and the film crew had stood by to film the

"illegal street racers" shown in the item.

TV3's Response to the Formal Complaint – 13 October 1997

Assessing the complaint under standard G13 of the Television Code of Broadcasting

Practice, TV3 explained that the focus of the item was how the police and the

community successfully stamped out illegal drag racing activity on the streets of

Oamaru. It was a valid and responsible item which had the support of the police.

TV3 said the definition of "drag racing" in the NZ Pocket Office Dictionary was an

"acceleration race between cars over a short distance". While the Association's

definition was acknowledged, TV3 maintained that its usage on the item conformed

with that of most New Zealanders. Further, TV3 maintained that the programme did

not imply that all drag racers were "hoons". Rather, if referred to "illegal" drag

racers.

As for the footage shown, TV3 said it was supplied by a person in Oamaru and

neither the presenter nor the crew had been present when the activities were taking

place.

TV3 declined to uphold the complaint.

Ms Mickleson's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – Received

30 October 1997

Dissatisfied with TV3's decision, Ms Mickleson referred her complaint to the

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

Reiterating her point that drag racing in New Zealand had received a bad press, she

said that the media tended to portray any hoon with a car as a drag racer. As a result,

the sport of drag racing was belittled, made to look unprofessional, and that reduced

the chances of obtaining sponsorship.

In reality, she wrote, drag racing was about safety in a controlled environment. She

had also approached some people in other organisations and had been successful in

that they had advised that they would stop using the term "drag racing" when

referring to "illegal street racers". TV3, however, had refused to agree to such action.

Ms Mickleson concluded:

All I want to do is clean up the image of Drag Racing in New Zealand. With

the above agencies help, we are starting to do this, and ask that you rule that this

programme was out of line with what they were trying to portray.

TV3's Report to the Authority – 13 November 1997

TV3 advised that it did not wish to comment further.