BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary

Storylines which ran through five episodes of Shortland Street broadcast at 7.00pm during the week 31 August to 4 September 1998, concerned the intimate relationships of three sets of characters. The first storyline featured the relationship between a 17 year old female and a 28 old male, the second portrayed a male character who was painting a nude portrait of his partner, and the third concerned a male character who manipulated a young woman with whom he wished to have sex.

Ms Barker complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, that the storylines were offensive because they portrayed sex outside marriage as acceptable, and failed to examine the damaging consequences of such behaviour. She considered that the programmes’ PGR classification and 7.00pm timeslot were inappropriate, as many younger children could still be viewing at that time.

TVNZ responded that Shortland Street was a drama series designed to reflect the social issues, mores and dilemmas which occurred in real life. The episodes objected to, it argued, did not portray any explicit material and were not offensive. It refuted the complainant’s assertion that the programmes were inappropriately classified and scheduled.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ’s decision, Ms Barker 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

Acting pursuant to a delegation of powers under s.29 of the Broadcasting Act 1989, two members of the Authority have viewed the five episodes of Shortland Street complained about and have read the correspondence listed in the Appendix. In this instance, the Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

Three storylines ran through the five episodes of Shortland Street which were broadcast by TVNZ Ltd between 7.00 and 7.30pm during the week of 31 August to 4 September 1998. The storylines concerned the relationships of three sets of characters. The first storyline featured the relationship between a 17 year old female and a 28 old male, the second portrayed a male character who was painting a nude portrait of his partner, and the third concerned a male character who manipulated a young woman with whom he wished to have sex.

Glenyss Barker of Christchurch complained that each of these storylines portrayed "sex outside marriage" as acceptable. She considered that portrayal objectionable because it did not inform the many younger viewers, who could be viewing at the relatively early hour of 7.00pm, of the often damaging consequences of sexual relationships entered into on a casual basis. She asserted that the programme should not have screened before 8.30pm.

TVNZ considered the complaint, as requested by the complainant, under standards G2 and G12 and also assessed it under standard G8 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. These 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.

G8 To abide by the classification codes and their appropriate time bands as outlined in the agreed criteria for programme classifications.

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

In its assessment under standard G2, TVNZ considered that the storylines of the five episodes in question had not strayed beyond the bounds of taste and decency. The standard was not breached, it maintained, given the context of the storylines in a PGR classified drama series which was designed to reflect real-life issues and dilemmas, especially those which occurred in relationships. It also pointed out that the episodes objected to did not portray any explicit material.

With regard to standard G8, the broadcaster argued that PGR was the appropriate classification for the programme. It acknowledged that it was more suited to an adult audience but also believed that most adult viewers would not object to youngsters watching providing it was with the guidance of a parent or caregiver. TVNZ accordingly did not consider that standard G8 had been contravened.

In relation to standard G12, TVNZ referred to Broadcasting Standards Authority decision No: 1998-097, where it ruled:

As the Authority believes the programme had carried the appropriate classification (PGR), it necessarily concludes that the broadcaster had met its obligations under standard G12 to be mindful of the effect of the programme on children.

The broadcaster stated that, in its view, the broadcast had not threatened standard G12.

In her referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority, Ms Barker reiterated that the storylines were suitable only for an adult audience as they promoted unacceptable standards of morality when, more than ever before, it was necessary to present children with good models of social behaviour. Ms Barker maintained that Shortland Street should screen after 8.30pm when younger children were less likely to be watching. She acknowledged TVNZ’s contention that Shortland Street was a work of fiction but argued that it did not allow for the fact that many children were unable to differentiate between fictional and factual portrayals on television. The complainant also disputed TVNZ’s contention that the vast majority of adult viewers would not object to youngsters watching Shortland Street provided it was with guidance of a caregiver and submitted that television was often used by parents as a "babysitter". She also considered that TVNZ’s quote from an earlier Authority decision, in relation to the standard G12 aspect of the complaint, was not relevant as it was unrelated to the episodes she objected to.

The Authority’s Findings

As background to its decision, the Authority notes TVNZ’s description of Shortland Street as a long-established drama series which does not portray the world as it ought to be but depicts recognisable real life situations and behaviour via a fictitious community and set of characters. The series explores topical social issues and dilemmas from many different angles.

The first issue for the Authority to decide is whether a PGR classification and timeband was appropriate for the programmes objected to. The PGR programme classification code states:

PGR  Programmes containing material more suited to adult audiences but not necessarily unsuitable for child viewers when subject to the guidance of a parent or adult.

The Authority first notes that storylines involving three fictitious relationships were explored throughout five episodes. The Authority considers that the storylines portrayed in these episodes were appropriate for inclusion in a programme aimed at an adolescent and young adult audience which carried a PGR classification advising adult guidance for younger viewers. It believes the issues raised were relevant for the programme’s target audience and also that they could be reasonably expected to be explored in a PGR classified drama series. It notes that there was no explicit visual material contained in the programmes which could jeopardise a PGR rating. The Authority therefore concludes that the appropriate classification was assigned to the programmes in question.

The Authority next assesses, in relation to standard G2, whether the programme exceeded currently accepted norms of decency and taste in language and behaviour. In doing so, it is obliged to take into account the context in which that language and behaviour occurred. Having viewed the episodes in question, the Authority disagrees with the complainant’s contention that the programmes contained the message that "sex outside marriage" was acceptable, and that they promoted promiscuous behaviour. The nature of an episodic drama, the Authority observes, is such that the behaviour and circumstances of its characters are presented in a more sensational or theatrical manner than would occur in real life. Nonetheless, the types of relationships portrayed in Shortland Street do occur and, in the Authority’s view, were suitable for portrayal in a PGR classified drama where the intended audience could be expected to have the maturity to recognise their fictional nature. The Authority again notes that this was not a case where the footage depicted unacceptable or explicit images.

In determining the complaint under standard G12, the Authority observes that it was a combination of dialogue and image which portrayed the circumstances and behaviour complained about. Therefore, it believes that a degree of sophistication and experience of the world on the part of the viewer was required in order for the portrayal to be understood. Younger viewers who did have the necessary maturity to understand the issues the programmes explored were unlikely to be adversely affected by the programme. For these reasons the Authority concludes that standard G12 was not breached.

Finally, the Authority observes that it is required to judge each complaint against the guidelines rather than arbitrate on morals. On this occasion, the Authority concludes that there was no breach of standards.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
17 December 1998

Appendix

The following correspondence was received and considered by the Authority in determining the complaint:

1. Ms Glenyss Barker’s Formal Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd
    – 8 September 1998

2. TVNZ’s Response to the Formal Complaint – 28 September 1998

3. Ms Barker’s Referral of the Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority
    – 9 October 1998

4. TVNZ’s Response to the Authority – 2 November 1998

5. Ms Barker’s Final Comment to the Authority, with attachments – 10 November 1998