BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

The "Bluffer’s Guide" is a regular feature of Ansett Time of Your Life. In the programme broadcast on TV3 on 26 May 1998 at 8.00pm, it focused on cigar smoking.

Mr Pester of Pahiatua complained through the Broadcasting Standards Authority to TV3 Network Services Ltd that the programme glorified cigar smoking in a manner which would be attractive to young people. He argued that TV3 had employed a deceptive programme practice because it encouraged young people to smoke cigars, and that it had failed to be mindful of the effect of the programme on children. In addition, he contended that it had contravened the Smokefree Environments Act 1990.

TV3 responded that the programme, while rated G, was aimed at a mature audience. It did not believe that the segment would have appealed to children, and noted that the host did not reinforce the behaviour by smoking herself. With respect to the argument that it had breached the Smokefree Environments Act, TV3 responded that as no payment for the item was made, it was not considered to be a tobacco product advertisement to which the Act applied.

Dissatisfied with TV3’s decision, Mr Pester 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 upholds the complaint that standard G12 was breached.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed a tape of 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.

A regular feature of Ansett Time of Your Life is the "Bluffer’s Guide" in which one of the presenters examines a particular subject requiring a certain level of knowledge. In the programme broadcast on 26 May 1998 at 8.00pm, the topic was cigar smoking.

The segment was presented by regular presenter Petra Bagust, who described cigars as "the ultimate accessory for the sex symbol of the 90s" and mentioned that celebrities Arnold Schwarzeneger, Mel Gibson and Elle McPherson were all known to enjoy cigars. Viewers were advised how to select, cut and smoke cigars, and told what to look for in a good cigar.

Mr Pester complained to TV3 Network Services Ltd that the programme glorified cigar smoking and promoted it to young viewers as a positive and sophisticated activity. In his view, that was neither socially nor morally acceptable as it would have encouraged children to smoke cigars. Mr Pester referred to the Smokefree Environments Act and pointed out that under that legislation, the promotion of cigars was banned. He argued that TV3 had clearly contravened that Act.

TV3 advised that it considered the complaint under standards G7 and G12 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. Those standards require broadcasters:

G7 To avoid the use of any deceptive programme practice in the presentation of programmes which takes advantage of the confidence viewers have in the integrity of broadcasting.

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

TV3 argued that standard G7 was irrelevant, as it applied to situations such as where a broadcaster deceived viewers by, for example, screening a programme it knew to be fiction as if it were a news broadcast or a factual programme. Therefore, it argued, it was not applicable to this broadcast.

With respect to standard G12, TV3 argued that although the programme contained information about cigars and cigar smoking, it was unlikely to appeal to children as it appeared expensive, "ritualistic" and "controlled". TV3 noted that although the host introduced the segment by naming some of the "90s sex symbols" who smoked cigars, that information was available from other sources. It added that cigar smoking was not visually endorsed by the host, who was not shown smoking, even though she was legally able to should she wish. It declined to uphold the complaint under this standard.

TV3 then dealt with the matter of the breach of the Smokefree Environments Act 1990. It interpreted that legislation as only applying to a promotion where money was paid, or any valuable thing was given in exchange for the promotion. It reported that no such transaction had occurred in connection with the programme complained about, and therefore the item could not be construed as a tobacco product advertisement.

The Authority’s Findings

The Authority deals first with the complaint that the item breached standard G7. It concurs with TV3’s interpretation of the standard, and agrees that it applies to technical trickery which is intended to deceive viewers. However it takes Mr Pester’s argument under that head into account when it deals with other aspects of the complaint.

The Authority then turns to the complaint that TV3 had not been mindful of the effect of the programme on children. First, it notes that the programme was broadcast at 8.00pm, a time when children could be expected to be watching television. Although it notes TV3’s point that the programme is aimed at a mature audience, it considers it would also attract an audience of younger viewers. In particular, the Authority notes that the other two presenters of the programme are well known sports personalities who appeal, and are well-known to, young viewers.

It is the Authority’s view that by describing cigars as the "ultimate accessory for the sex symbol of the 90s", the segment portrayed cigar smoking as a glamorous and appealing activity. This was further endorsed by naming famous people who were known to be cigar smokers, including Elle McPherson, a powerful role model to teenage girls, who comprise the group known to be taking up smoking in large numbers. No negative effects of cigar smoking were alluded to – it was presented as an enjoyable and relaxing pastime to aspire to. In addition, the protocols and rituals associated with smoking cigars were detailed, and advice given on how to smoke them. The Authority concludes that the message was clear that cigar smoking was attractive, sexy and desirable.

Having concluded that the segment gave a positive endorsement of cigar smoking, the Authority then examines the possible effect of that endorsement on younger viewers. It considers that the item had the potential to harm in a number of ways. The dangers to health from smoking are well known, and in New Zealand there are a range of controls on smoking which are based on exactly this premise. Prominent among these are prohibitions on the advertisement and display of tobacco products, and on sales to young persons under the age of 18 years. In addition, considerable effort and money has been expended in recent years on education efforts about the harmful effects of smoking.

The Authority considers that teenagers, and girls particularly, would have been susceptible to the message portrayed in this item. It does not agree with TV3 when it contends that the price and rituals associated with smoking cigars would be a deterrent to young viewers. On the contrary, it believes they helped to contribute to the mystique and apparent glamour of cigar smoking.

In the Authority’s view, cigar smoking was portrayed as socially desirable by its association with fashion and glamorous 90s sex symbols, and its apparent endorsement by the presenter.

The complainant further raised a concern that this item contravened the provisions of the Smokefree Environments Act 1990. Whether or not the provisions of that Act have been contravened is not a matter for the Authority, as it is not the policing agency under that Act. In addition, there is room for differing views about some of the definitions in that Act, and whether a programme such as the present one could be said to be a tobacco product advertisement for the purposes of that Act. It is not necessary, in making its finding that broadcasting standards have been breached, for the Authority to make any finding on the broadcaster’s obligations under the Smokefree Environments Act.

In reaching its conclusion that the segment of Ansett Time of Your Life breached standard G12, the Authority has taken into account the time of the broadcast; the presenter’s appeal to a young audience; the positive endorsement of cigar smoking and its association with fashion, glamour and sex symbols; the known high uptake of smoking among teenagers, particularly among girls; and the detailed advice given on how to smoke cigars.

For the reasons set forth above, the Authority upholds the complaint that the broadcast by TV3 Network Services Ltd of Ansett Time of your Life on 26 May 1998 at 8.00pm breached standard G12 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice.

Having upheld the complaint, the Authority may make an order under s.13 and s.16 of the Broadcasting Act 1989. The Authority makes no order on this occasion as it is the first time a breach such as this has occurred, and it considers it sufficient that it has drawn the matter to the broadcaster’s attention.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
29 October 1998

Appendix

Carl Pester’s Complaint to TV3 Network Services Ltd – 2 June 1998

Mr Pester of Pahiatua complained through the Broadcasting Standards Authority about Ansett Time of Your Life which was broadcast on TV3 on 26 May 1998. The complaint was forwarded to TV3 Network Services Ltd and accepted as a formal complaint.

Mr Pester complained that the programme glorified cigar smoking to the point of showing people how to smoke them properly. He argued that there had been so much anti-cigarette campaigning that young people had started taking up cigar smoking under the misconception that it was not as bad for their health.

Mr Pester expressed his strong sense of frustration at the item. He wrote:

I am a secondary school science teacher who spends time every year trying to educate my pupils about the harmful effects of smoking. Of course I am not a sporting hero or TV front person and so a lot of them probably take what I say with a grain of salt. Whereas to see ‘sporting heroes’ and respected people promoting cigar smoking will have a much greater influence on them. What you did in three minutes probably undoes what all of New Zealand teachers have done in five years.

Mr Pester implored the broadcaster to somehow counter the effects the article would have had. He suggested that a formal condemnation of cigar smoking would be the least that could be done.

In a second letter, dated 26 June, Mr Pester elaborated on his complaint. He wrote that he considered the item breached standards G7 and G12 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice and the Smokefree Environments Act 1990.

With regard to standard G7, he argued that TV3 had taken advantage of the confidence viewers had in the integrity of broadcasting. In particular, he wrote, the programme was presented as a genuine, good "advertainment" programme. In his view, to use it to promote cigar smoking was surely a deceptive programme practice.

Mr Pester maintained that standard G12 was breached because TV3 was not mindful of its effects on children. In his view, it would certainly encourage children to smoke cigars.

Mr Pester pointed out that under the Smokefree Act, the advertising and promotion of cigars was banned.

In Mr Pester’s opinion, the item clearly breached the law.

TV3’s Response to the Formal Complaint – 31 July 1998

TV3 advised that it considered the complaint under standards G7 and G12 which were nominated by Mr Pester.

It noted that the programme was rated G and was aimed at a more mature audience which had funds available for travelling. TV3 pointed out that a regular segment of the show was "the bluffer’s guide", which showed how to appear knowledgeable about everything from wine to beauty therapy. The "bluffer’s guide" on this occasion focused on cigars.

TV3 responded first that standard G7 did not apply as it related to the use of trickery to deceive viewers. That had not occurred here.

With respect to standard G12, TV3 responded that having viewed the programme several times, it observed that the cigar smoking in the programme appeared to be very expensive (the scissors used to cut the cigar cost $700) and very controlled ("like sipping fine wine"). It pointed out that the information about "90’s sex symbols" smoking was not reinforced in the programme as the presenter was not seen smoking.

TV3 concluded that although the programme contained information about cigars and cigar smoking, it was unlikely to appeal to children as it appeared expensive, ritualistic and the basis for its enjoyment was that it was "controlled tasting". Further, it noted, cigar smoking was not visually endorsed by the host as she was not shown smoking.

With respect to Mr Pester’s argument about a breach of the Smokefree Environments Act 1990, TV3 responded that no payment was given for the screening of the item and therefore it was not considered a "tobacco product advertisement" to which the Act applied.

Mr Pester’s Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 23 August 1998

Dissatisfied with TV3’s decision, Mr Pester referred the complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

Mr Pester advised that he did not accept TV3’s interpretation of standard G7. He suggested that as the item promoted cigar smoking, it was neither socially nor morally acceptable, and as such was deceptive and misleading.

He also objected to TV3’s attempt to justify the item when it reported that the programme focused on "the best that’s on offer". He repeated that the public should not be deceived into believing cigar smoking was socially or morally acceptable.

With respect to TV3’s response under standard G12, Mr Pester maintained that its arguments were illogical.

First he argued, the item showing cigar smoking in a positive light sent wrong messages to youth. The fact that the programme emphasised they were expensive did not, in his view, negate those messages. He also rejected TV3’s argument that as it appeared expensive it would be unlikely to appeal to children. He listed a number of activities which were expensive and which had appeal to children.

In Mr Pester’s view, the fact that cigar smoking was like "sipping fine wine" would simply reinforce a positive image, and even introduced a sophisticated image. He said he was dumbfounded by TV3’s lack of logic when it said that cigar smoking was extremely unlikely to appeal to children because the basis of its enjoyment appeared to be "controlled tasting or ‘sipping.’" He wrote:

Everybody knows (especially the advertisers), except for the members of [TV3’s] Standards Committee presumably, that children strive to look sophisticated and grown up.

Next Mr Pester responded to the point that the presenter, by not smoking herself, did not endorse it. He disagreed with that conclusion, and argued that the presenter showed interest in cigar smoking and how to do it, and promoted it to viewers. He described as nonsense TV3’s argument that it was not visually endorsed, and pointed out that she was seen in a cigar shop telling viewers about it. Surely, he argued, that was an endorsement.

Mr Pester argued that it was irresponsible for the producer to show Arnold Schwarzeneger and Elle McPherson smoking cigars, as it simply gave more weight to the presenter’s endorsement.

Finally Mr Pester dealt with TV3’s response regarding the Smokefree Environments Act 1990. He maintained that the item clearly qualified as a tobacco advertisement, in spite of TV3’s assertions to the contrary.

Mr Pester concluded that TV3 had breached standards G7 and G12 and had broken the law (Smokefree Environments Act).

TV3’s Response to the Authority – 22 September 1998

TV3 advised that it had no further comments to make, except to reiterate that the programme was aimed at a more mature audience. It added:

…the purpose of the "Bluffer’s Guide" segment is to enable viewers to appear informed and knowledgeable about a wide range of subjects or activities which they themselves may never actually partake in.

Mr Pester’s Final Comment – 25 September 1998

Mr Pester described as irrelevant TV3’s argument that the programme aimed at a particular audience and that purpose of the "Bluffer’s Guide" was to make viewers appear knowledgeable. He reiterated that his complaint was concerned with the message portrayed.