BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

An episode of Newsflash broadcast on TV 2 on 15 September 1998 at 8.00pm contained, among other things, skits with a religious theme.

Mrs Gruijters complained to Television New Zealand Ltd that the skits were tasteless and offensive and she objected to what she perceived as an attempt to get laughs at all costs.

TVNZ responded informally in the first instance, and when asked to respond formally, advised that it considered the complainant’s objection was really one of personal preference rather than an assertion that statutory standards had been breached. Dealing with the specific matters to which Mrs Gruijters objected, it maintained that there was nothing in the programme which breached the good taste standard, and nothing which represented any group as inherently inferior or encouraged discrimination against them.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ’s response, Mrs Gruijters 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 declines to uphold the complaint.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed the item complained about and read the correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). On this occasion, the Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

An episode of the New Zealand-made comedy programme Newsflash was broadcast on 15 September 1998 at 8.00pm. Some of the skits had a religious theme.

Mrs Gruijters of Auckland complained to Television New Zealand Ltd that the skits were offensive. In particular, she objected to three skits which she considered mocked religion, one in which men were seen adjusting the crotch of their trousers, and one which mocked the birth of a less than perfect baby. In her view, it was inappropriate to broadcast such material as early as 8.00pm when children and teenagers were watching television.

TVNZ advised that it had assessed the complaint under standards G2 and G13 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. Those standards 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.

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 sex, 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:

factual, or

the expression of genuinely-held opinion in a news or current affairs programme, or

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

In TVNZ’s view, Mrs Gruijters’ complaint was more a matter of personal preference than an assertion that statutory broadcasting standards had been breached. It apologised for having offended her and advised that it had conveyed her concerns to the producers of the programme.

Commenting generally on the religious skits, TVNZ noted that it was loath to set restrictions on where the bounds of humour were, and argued that there was no reason why the religious professions should be exempt from being lampooned. Acknowledging that the religious figures were made fun of, TVNZ emphasised that the target of the programme was the television industry and the way news was presented.

TVNZ maintained that there was nothing in the items which exceeded currently accepted norms of decency and good taste, given that the programme consisted of a number of satirical skits.

As far as standard G13 was concerned, TVNZ advised that it found nothing in the programme which suggested that any group was represented as inherently inferior, or any encouragement to discriminate against any person or group. It also noted that the standard incorporated an exemption which covered humorous, satirical and dramatic work. It concluded there was no breach of standard G13.

Contrary perhaps to popular belief, the Authority does not have a role to play in adjudicating on quality in television or radio programmes. It is therefore constrained from commenting on the calibre of the humour in the items complained about. Its task is to decide whether a breach of programme standards occurred.

It turns first to the alleged breach of standard G2. Contextual considerations, such as the hour of the broadcast, the type of programme and the expectations of the audience are relevant to an assessment of this standard. The Authority concludes that, given those parameters, the skits did not breach the standard.

Next the Authority deals with the complaint that the items breached standard G13. It does not find that the content such as to encourage discrimination against any group, but even if it did, the Authority notes that the exemption under G13 (iii), which applies to humour and satire, would apply. It does not uphold this aspect of the complaint.

In addition to the standards cited by TVNZ, the Authority considers that the complaint also alleged that standard G12 was breached. That standard requires broadcasters:

G12 To be mindful of the effect any programme may have on children during their normally accepted viewing hours.

The Authority notes that the programme was broadcast during PGR time. It concludes that it was not unsuitable for children who were subject to the guidance of a parent or adult.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
26 November 1998

Appendix

Elisabeth Gruijters’ Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd – 17 September 1998

Mrs Gruijters of Auckland complained to Television New Zealand Ltd about an episode of Newsflash broadcast on 15 September 1998 on TV2 at 8.00pm.

In her letter, Mrs Gruijters noted that she had telephoned TVNZ and when she gave reasons why she wanted to make a complaint, the receptionist responded by saying "Well you won’t be watching it again, will you?" Mrs Gruijters advised that indeed she would not watch it again, but added that she wanted to make sure that the programme would not be repeated, particularly at 8.00pm in the evening when children and teenagers could still be around.

In a brief response from the Public Relations Department of TVNZ dated 28 September, Mrs Gruijters was assured that there were four internal appraisers who scrutinised all programmes to ensure that they conformed to the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. She was told that TVNZ believed that parents were the ultimate censors, and the comprehensive classification system was there to help parents choose what was appropriate viewing for their children.

In a letter dated 29 September, Mrs Gruijters forwarded the correspondence to the Broadcasting Standards Authority. She identified the following as matters which offended her:

the way they had a Bishop in full regalia run around;

the way they portrayed nuns rubbing ointment on a hairy leg and a dog licking it off;

men standing in a row adjusting their trousers in a tasteless way;

a priest with rosary beads around his neck and a cross in his hand trying to help a sportsman on the ground;

mocking the birth of an "awful-looking" baby.

Mrs Gruijters explained that the reason these skits offended her was that she did not like to see a mockery made of any religion. The rest she considered seemed to be an effort to get laughs at all costs.

Regarding TVNZ’s response, she wrote that it was a cause for concern if the programme had been passed by four internal appraisers for screening at 8.00pm.

TVNZ’s Response to the Formal Complaint – 9 October 1998

TVNZ advised that it had considered the complaints in the context of standards G2 and G13 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice.

It reported that it was inclined to the view that Mrs Gruijters’ objection was really one of personal preference, rather than an assertion that statutory standards had been breached. TVNZ said it was sorry that she was offended but did not see in her letter an argument for a breach of the standards. It continued:

We accept, of course, that it is not possible to please all viewers all of the time. New Zealanders have a wide range of tastes and TVNZ tries to provide a range of programmes such that all will find something to their liking.

We note that the Broadcasting Act, in Section 5(c) states that "complaints based merely on a complainant’s preferences are not, in general, capable of being resolved by a complaints procedure".

As a general comment on the religious skits, TVNZ responded that it was loath to set restrictions on where the bounds of humour might be. It considered the ability to laugh at ourselves and with one another was an important aspect of social life. It said it saw no reason why the religious professions should be exempt from being lampooned. TVNZ noted that although religious figures were undoubtedly made fun of in a kindly way, the overall target of the programme was the television industry and the way the news was presented. As far as the baby skit was concerned, it saw it as an inoffensive joke at the expense of the "aesthetically correct", adding that it did not make fun of handicapped children.

In reference to standard G2, TVNZ advised that it found nothing in the episode which breached the standard, given the context of a programme which consisted of a number of satirical skits, "and recognising that the concept of "taste" in such an environment is applied differently than would be the case in some other circumstances." TVNZ did not believe standard G2 was threatened.

As far as standard G13 was concerned, TVNZ responded that it did not find anything in the programme which suggested that any group of people were represented as "inherently inferior", nor did it find any encouragement to discriminate against any group. It also noted that standard G13 had a qualifying clause (iii) which allowed for the legitimate context of a humorous, satirical or dramatic work. It declined to uphold this aspect of the complaint.

Mrs Gruijters’ Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 12 October 1998

Dissatisfied with TVNZ’s decision, Mrs Gruijters referred the complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

By telephone Mrs Gruijters also complained that TVNZ had not dealt with each aspect of her complaint.

TVNZ’s Response to the Authority – 22 October 1998

TVNZ advised that it had no further comment to make.

Mrs Gruijters’ Final Comment – 30 October 1998

Mrs Gruijters repeated that there were five skits which she had complained about. She said they mocked a bishop, some nuns, a priest and parents of a handicapped child, and showed men behaving in an indecent way.

She noted that she had omitted to mention a sequence which showed naked people running around as she had not videoed the programme and had forgotten about it.