BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

The importance of sex education for children and young adults was stressed in an item

on TV One's Body and Soul broadcast at 9.05pm on 20 May. The programme

referred to the importance of safe sex and the use of condoms. The weekly magazine

programme presents items on healthy lifestyles.

Mr Fountain complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, that it was

irresponsible to encourage teenage sex, with nothing being said about the psychological

effects of promiscuity. Furthermore, it had not advanced the alternative of saying

"No", and, as a result, breached the standards requiring good taste and decency, and

balance.

Maintaining that the term "children" was used to describe all offspring and that it was

acceptable, in a programme broadcast after 9.00pm aimed at sexually active teenagers

and young adults, to confine the information included in the broadcast to the issues

dealt with, TVNZ declined to uphold the complaint. Dissatisfied with TVNZ's

decision, Mr Fountain referred the complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority

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

For the reasons given below, a majority of the Authority declined to uphold the

standard G6 aspect of the complaint.

The Authority unanimously declined to uphold the other aspect of the complaint.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed the programme 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.

One of the items on Body and Soul broadcast by Television One on 20 May 1994 at

9.05pm addressed the issues of safe sex and the use of condoms, particularly in

relation to young people.

Mr Fountain complained that it was unbalanced for the item to emphasise sexual

activity for teenagers as being normal and natural with no reference to the

psychological effects of promiscuity and no mention that it was all right to say no to

sex. He maintained that by advocating free sex as normal, problems such as STDs

would increase. In addition, he complained that the portrayal of teenagers engaging in

sexual activity, albeit fully clothed, was a breach of the standard requiring good taste

and decency.

TVNZ reported that it had assessed the complaint under the standards of the

Television Code of Broadcasting Practice nominated by Mr Fountain. 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.

G6  To show balance, impartiality and fairness in dealing with political

matters, current affairs and all questions of a controversial nature.

Explaining that the item emphasised the importance of parents providing sex advice

for their children, TVNZ explained that it was targeted at sexually active young people

who, it believed, needed compassionate and useful advice. TVNZ said that it had

interpreted Mr Fountain's complaint as suggesting that television's role was to adopt

a broader approach to the topic and to examine the question of promiscuity on a social

and psychological level. It rejected this suggestion, pointing out that it was not

television's role to change society but merely to reflect it and to offer programmes

which were relevant to various lifestyles. TVNZ suggested that sexually active young

people were a group which needed accurate information. Further, TVNZ argued that

while an abstinence message may have some impact on some young people, the reality

was that many were already sexually active and it was appropriate to provide that

group with accurate information that could protect them from potentially life

threatening diseases.

With reference to the complaint that the programme was in breach of standard G2,

TVNZ pointed out that it was screened after 9.00pm so that it reached its target

audience of teenagers and their parents and further, that the discussion about safe sex

for young people occurred in the context of an item about sex education. It rejected

the complaint that standard G2 was breached.

TVNZ also rejected the complaint that the item was unbalanced, pointing to an earlier

decision by the Authority's predecessor, the Broadcasting Tribunal, in which it had

decided, in a programme about AIDs awareness, that it was legitimate to limit the

information in the programme to its educational purpose. TVNZ argued in this

instance that it was not unbalanced to focus on a particular aspect of sex education.

Dealing first with the complaint that the item breached the requirement for good taste

and decency, the Authority considered Mr Fountain's argument that the portrayal of

teenagers engaging in sexual activity, albeit fully clothed, was indecent. The Authority

considered that while some of the visuals which accompanied the item portrayed

intimate behaviour, in the context of a programme about sexuality and safe sex, and the

hour at which the item was screened, standard G2 was not breached.

The Authority accepted that Mr Fountain's view – that providing information to

teenagers only about contraception and prevention of disease appears to condone, or

even promote, sexual activity – was shared by many in the community. However, the

majority of the Authority also accepted that there is a view that it is responsible to

acknowledge the fact that many teenagers and young adults are already sexually active

and to provide for them practical information about the best available method, apart

from abstinence, to guard against infection. Referring to the introduction to the item,

where the parameters were established, the majority noted that the host remarked that

teaching children about sex was one of the most important things a parent could do.

Then followed some discussion on why open communication between parents and

children was important, highlighting the shy and therefore ineffectual approach of

parents a generation ago.

The majority decided that the item's focus was on only one aspect of sex education,

the health aspect, and was geared to what parents and sexually active young people

should know about the physical health risks of promiscuity. The programme was not

directed at those young people for whom abstinence was the preferred option since

they were obviously not at risk. The majority concluded that in the context of Body

and Soul it was legitimate for the item to be confined to the physical health aspect of

sexual behaviour alone. It did not consider the lack of emphasis on abstinence meant

the item was unbalanced since it was aimed at the already sexually active and was

designed to offer practical advice on how to avoid the risks of infection. Accordingly

it declined to uphold the complaint that the item breached standard G6.

The minority, while agreeing that teaching children about sex was one of the most

important things a parent could do, did not consider that the item gave a balanced

approach to that important topic because it focused entirely on the theme of safe sex

and use of condoms. Further, not only did it say nothing about the option of

abstinence, but it conveyed the impression that those who chose abstinence were out

of step with their peers. In particular, the minority noted the voiceover which, in the

context of the changing attitudes of parents said of parents of a generation ago: "Any

really important information was obscured by sermons on the sins of sex before

marriage."

For the reasons set forth above a majority of the Authority declines to uphold

the standard G6 aspect of the complaint.

The Authority unanimously declines to uphold the other aspect of the complaint.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Iain Gallaway
Chairperson
6 October 199

Appendix

Mr W I G Fountain's Complaint to Television New Zealand Limited - 21 May

1994

Mr Fountain of Auckland complained to Television New Zealand Ltd about the way

the issue of safe sex for children had been dealt with in an item broadcast on Body and

Soul on Friday 20 May at 9.05pm.

The theme of the item, Mr Fountain wrote, was that sex instruction for teenagers had

been inadequate 20 years ago and, to rectify the situation, teenagers should be

instructed that sex was a normal part of life and that the use of condoms was

necessary for safe sex. If that was the best sex education that TVNZ could provide,

Mr Fountain exclaimed:

... it would be far better to keep out of the business altogether.

Mr Fountain stated that sex was a much more important matter than physical

gratification for which the programme had urged the use of condoms. The programme,

he added, had not acknowledged that it was all right for people to say "no".

He complained that the broadcast breached the standards requiring good taste and

decency, balance and the presentation of significant points of view when a

controversial issue was being discussed.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint - 26 July 1994

When TVNZ advised Mr Fountain of its Complaints Committee's decision it

explained that it had not replied earlier as it had mislaid Mr Fountain's original letter

of complaint. It reported that his complaint about the item, which emphasised to

parents the importance of sex advice for the young, had been assessed under standards

G2 and G6 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice.

TVNZ acknowledged that Mr Fountain favoured the approach whereby television

examined promiscuity on a broad social level rather than provide sex advice. However,

"a large number of teenagers" were sexually active and the consequences of unsafe sex

could be disastrous. Figures to justify these conclusions were supplied.

Noting, first, that television's role was to reflect society and not to change it, and

secondly, abstinence was not an option for many, TVNZ explained that the item had

been broadcast after 9.00pm in order to reach the target audience. Moreover, the

information was delivered in a light-hearted manner.

TVNZ declined to uphold the good taste complaint in view of the standard's

allowance for context. It also declined to uphold the complaint about imbalance

referring to a decision from the Broadcasting Tribunal 1990 (the Broadcasting

Standards Authority's predecessor) which accepted that a programme aimed at a

specific audience, was entitled to confine the information presented to the stated

purpose of the programme.

Mr Fountain's Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 30 July

1994

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's reply, Mr Fountain referred his complaint to the

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

The programme's introduction, he began, had referred to safe sex for "children". He

accepted that sex was natural in some situations but considered it irresponsible to

encourage teenagers to be sexually active.

He disputed TVNZ's comment that it was not television's role to change society and

questioned why advertisers spent vast sums on television advertising. He observed:

It is no coincidence that the increase in sexual activity amongst young people

coincided with the advent of television.

Pointing out that TVNZ's comment about abstinence was based on a poll of 18 year-

olds, he said that they were not "children" and, moreover, he did not accept TVNZ's

claim that the "vast majority of children are sexually active".

There were other ways of presenting the material in addition to the "moralistic"

alternative suggested by TVNZ. He had complained on the grounds:

I repeat that it is unbalanced to present the message to children that sex is

natural and all they have to do is to use condoms, without presenting the other

alternative.

One alternative, he explained, was to explain that it was acceptable to say "no".

Mr Fountain appended an article from the Readers' Digest entitled "The Myth of

Safe Sex".

TVNZ's Response to the Authority - 9 August 1994

As is its practice, the Authority sought the broadcaster's response to the complaint.

TVNZ said that Mr Fountain was under a misapprehension when he argued that the

programme was directed at children. That term had been used in the introduction to

refer to all off-spring - regardless of age - and the item had been targeted at the

sexually-active teenage and young adult group. Repeating that the item was broadcast

after 9.00pm, TVNZ said that the need for sex education had been reinforced by a

recent international conference on AIDs in Japan.

Describing Mr Fountain's comment about advertising as a "red herring", TVNZ stated

that it was not the role of television programme makers to change society.

Mr Fountain's Final Comment to the Authority - 17 August 1994

When asked whether he wished to comment briefly on TVNZ's reply, Mr Fountain

described it as prevarication. The item had referred to children and while he agreed

with the need for sex education, it needed to be balanced.

Insisting that the programme was designed to change the behaviour of teenagers by

encouraging them to use condoms, he repeated his argument that sex education which

did not acknowledge and agree that it was reasonable to say "No", was "imbalanced

propaganda".