BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

"Genocide" was the title of the episode of World at War broadcast on TV One

between 2.30–3.30pm on Sunday 9 June 1996.

Referring to some horrendous scenes in the broadcast, Mr Fowlie complained to

Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, that it was inappropriate to broadcast

the item during children's normally accepted viewing times.

TVNZ accepted that the broadcast breached the standards as the programme should

have been classified as PGR, rather than G, and thus should have been screened at a

time when parents and caregivers could monitor their children's viewing. It was

unable to explain how the incorrect classification had been entered into its computer

and said that checks had been made to ensure that all other episodes were correctly

classified as PGR.

Dissatisfied that TVNZ did not accept that the episode warranted an AO

classification, Mr Fowlie referred TVNZ's decision 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). As is its practice, the Authority

determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

The episode of the World at War series entitled "Genocide" was broadcast on TV One

between 2.30–3.30pm on Sunday 9 June. At the beginning of the broadcast, the

classification "G" was shown on the screen.

Listing some of the horrendous scenes contained in the programme which focussed on

the Nazi persecution of the Jews, Mr Fowlie complained to TVNZ that the broadcast

breached the requirement in the standards for broadcasters to be mindful of the effect

that programmes had on children during their normally accepted viewing periods.

TVNZ assessed the programme under standards G8 and G12 of the Television Code

of Broadcasting Practice. They require broadcasters:

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 time.

TVNZ reported that the programme had been incorrectly classified as G. It should

have been rated as PGR and, TVNZ reported, it had checked the classification of the

other episodes to ensure that they were correct. It was unable to explain how the

error had occurred and apologised for it. It upheld the complaint under both

standards.

On the basis that children, subject to parental supervision, should not be deprived of

the opportunity to become aware of the depth of depravity of which humankind was

capable, TVNZ maintained that a PGR classification was appropriate.

Describing the programme as one of the most harrowing and disturbing that could be

aired on television, Mr Fowlie argued that AO was the appropriate classification. He

acknowledged that parents had a responsibility to monitor their children's viewing but

he expected broadcasters to facilitate the parental task by not broadcasting gruesome

material before the evening watershed.

When TVNZ insisted that a PGR classification was appropriate in view of the

important moral message contained in the broadcast, Mr Fowlie retorted that the

contents of the programme were inappropriate for young children regardless of

parental oversight.

The television programme classifications read:

General – G

Programmes which exclude material likely to be unsuitable for children under 14

years of age, although they may not necessarily be designed for child viewers.

"G" programmes may be screened at any time.

Parental Guidance Recommended – 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.

"PGR" programmes may be screened between 9 am and 4 pm and after 7 pm

until 6 am.

Adults Only – AO

Programmes containing adult themes or those which, because of the way the

material is handled, would be unsuitable for persons under 18 years of age.

"AO" programmes are restricted to screening between midday and 3 pm on

weekdays (except during school and public holidays) and after 8.30 pm until 5

am.

The Authority considers Mr Fowlie's description of this episode of World at War as

"harrowing" to be very appropriate. It believes that some of the scenes were highly

disturbing. Indeed, in view of the impact of the programme, the Authority expresses

some surprise that commercial breaks were included. In making this observation, it is

aware that such breaks have been excluded from programmes broadcast by TVNZ

which have been acknowledged as equally harrowing.

On this occasion, the Authority's task was to consider whether TVNZ was correct in

its classification of the programme as PGR. Mr Fowlie argued for an AO rating. The

Authority agrees with both Mr Fowlie and the broadcaster that a G rating was totally

inappropriate. The Authority again finds itself in agreement with some of the other

points advanced by the parties. For example, it accepts Mr Fowlie's argument that

the programme is unlikely to be suitable for younger viewers in any circumstances and

to be unsuitable for younger unsupervised viewers who came across it inadvertently.

On the other hand, the Authority agrees with TVNZ that the programme contains an

important message and, it believes that such messages should be disseminated as a

cautionary reminder of man's capabilities.

Overall, in the Authority's opinion, it is a programme which should not be viewed by

children without parental guidance and, where appropriate, parental supervision. The

Authority considers, accordingly, that a PGR classification places the responsibility

where it should rest – on parents and caregivers. It concludes therefore that a PGR

rating is appropriate.

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

Television New Zealand Ltd's action, having upheld the complaint, was

insufficient.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Judith Potter
Chairperson
22 August 1996

Appendix

Mr Fowlie's Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd - 9 June 1996

John Fowlie of Paeroa complained to Television New Zealand Ltd about the broadcast

of an episode of World at War from 2.30 - 3.30pm on 9 June. Maintaining that the

programme was screened at an inappropriate time, Mr Fowlie considered that the

broadcast breached the requirement in the standards for broadcasters to be mindful of

the effect that programmes had on children during their normally accepted viewing

times.

Pointing out that the particular episode focussed on the Nazi persecution of Jews, Mr

Fowlie listed some of the horrendous scenes included in it. He considered that it was

inappropriate to screen such material while children might be watching.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint - 24 June 1996

Assessing the complaint under standards G8 and G12 of the Television Code of

Broadcasting Practice, TVNZ reported that the programme had been incorrectly

classified as G. It should have been rated PGR and, it said, the other episodes of

World at War had been checked to ensure that they had the correct certificates.

TVNZ was unable to explain why the particular episode had been wrongly listed in its

computer system. It wrote:

As a consequence, TVNZ has upheld your complaint as a breach of standard

G8. We apologise for showing the incorrect classification symbol at the

beginning of the programme and we thank you for drawing this matter to our

attention.

As for the complaint about the programme's suitability for children, TVNZ said it

gave rise to the question as to whether children should be aware of the depth of

depravity of which humanity was capable. On the basis that this was an issue of

parental discretion, and as parental supervision was an aspect of the PGR rating,

TVNZ said it was the responsibility of parents and caregivers to decide whether

children should view the material. It observed:

While we respect your genuine concern for the impact this programme may have

had on children, it is our view that it would have been acceptable had its proper

PGR certificate been attached.

Apologising for the error, it added:

Because the programme was incorrectly screened as a "G" programme we must,

of course, uphold this complaint also as a breach of G12 - but emphasise that we

do so only because the incorrect classification symbol was shown.

Mr Fowlie's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 8 July 1996

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's reasoning when upholding the standard G12 complaint, Mr

Fowlie referred his complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a)

of the Broadcasting Act 1989. He argued that the programme should be classified AO

rather than PGR.

Listing again some details of the scenes contained in the broadcast, Mr Fowlie wrote:

I would describe this programme as one of the most harrowing and emotionally

disturbing to be aired on public television in this country. I dispute TVNZ's

interpretation of the PGR standard. If the above mentioned cases singularly or

taken as a whole are deemed "... not necessarily unsuitable for child viewers

when subject to the guidance of a parent or adult." Then I would argue that

TVNZ could classify any AO programme as PGR as it sees fit.

While agreeing that parents had a responsibility to monitor their children's viewing, he

said that he expected the broadcasters to facilitate such control. That would mean

confining programmes containing particularly disturbing content until after the evening

watershed. He expressed the view:

By broadcasting such content during mid afternoon on a weekend TVNZ have

undermined the ability of parents to exercise guidance in this instance. TVNZ

unnecessarily exposed very young children to images which no reasonable parent

would choose to expose their child.

In conclusion, he asked the Authority to classify the programme as AO and to require

TVNZ to broadcast an apology for a serious breach of standard G12.

TVNZ's Response to the Authority - 16 July 1996

In its report to the Authority, TVNZ acknowledged that many of the scenes were

harrowing:

... but we believe that learning of the debased side of human nature revealed in

the Holocaust (and it would seem more recently in Bosnia) is an important part

of growing up, and is something that youngsters should be introduced to, and

guided through, by parents and guardians. PGR is the appropriate certificate we

suggest because this indicates the need for adult guidance, while AO would deny

all under 18 the opportunity to learn the lessons that war time has taught.

Arguing that the programme contained an important moral message, TVNZ maintained

that most parents would want their children to grow up to be aware of the capability

of man for depravity, and thus the PGR classification was not inappropriate.

Mr Fowlie's Final Comment - 21 July 1996

Arguing that the point at issue was how much information was appropriate for a given

age group, Mr Fowlie considered that the material contained in the programme

complained about went beyond a factual report to include emotionally disturbing

material. Because of the seriousness of the subject matter, he said, an AO

classification would have alerted parents of the need to exercise particular care as to

whether the contents were appropriate. Mr Fowlie wrote:

When my four and half year old son, as he is accustomed, turns on the TV at

3.00pm for ChatterBox the preschoolers show and is instead confronted with a

description of how Himmler felt ill and nauseous because he was splattered with

human brains while witnessing his first execution, then I as a parent believe the

broadcaster is remiss in their obligation as a public service and corporate citizen.

When I receive their replies stating how educationally important that children

should view this material I can only think of the stolen innocence on my son's

face. What benefit does a 4 year old gain from being shown this, or for that

matter an eight or ten year old? TVNZ arguments are farcical and sick.