BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

Xmas for Lou was the title of the New Zealand drama shown on TV1's Montana Sunday

Theatre at 8.35pm on 5 December 1993.

Mr Kempson complained to Television New Zealand Ltd about the use of the foul language

in the broadcast which he described as totally unacceptable and contrary to the accepted

norms of good taste and decency.

Pointing out the use of the expression "fuck you" was central to the drama's tension and

plot, TVNZ said that it was acceptable to use the term in "AO" time taking context into

account. Dissatisfied with TVNZ's decision, Mr Kempson 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 declined to uphold 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.

A New Zealand play set in 1959 was broadcast as the feature drama on Montana Sunday

Theatre at 8.30pm on Sunday 5 December 1993. Entitled Xmas for Lou, it dealt with a

family's Christmas celebrations when one daughter, Ngaire, returned home unexpectedly

from London. It transpired that the child called Lou who was being raised by her sister

June, was in fact Ngaire's off-spring and that June's husband, apparently unacknowledged

by June, was in fact Lou's father. While Ngaire was living in London, June, her husband

and Lou had remained living with her parents who were practising Catholics. As Ngaire's

intentions towards Lou were not explicit initially, the play recorded the tension which

developed between the flamboyant Ngaire and the more conventional June.

While sitting with the family at Christmas dinner, June realised that Ngaire wanted to

take Lou to London with her. As an angry response, she shouted "fuck you" at her. Her

mother objected strongly to the language and slapped June and, as an indication of how

objectionable she found the word, was distinctly cold towards her for some time. June and

Ngaire when alone later engaged in a fight and the immediate tension aroused by Ngaire's

visit was released.

Mr Kempson complained that the use of the term noted above was totally unacceptable in

any circumstances and contravened the norms of good taste and decency.

TVNZ assessed the complaint under G2 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice

which requires 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.

Pointing out that the programme was broadcast in "AO" time and had been preceded by a

warning about language and emphasising the requirement in the standard to take context

into account, TVNZ declined to uphold the complaint. Indeed, it described the scene in

which the term was used "as central to the plot" and an "absolutely, integral part of the

story". It referred to the Authority's Decision No: 164/93 where the use of the word

"fuck" in a film had been accepted in a scene which was pivotal to that story.

TVNZ reported that in 1993 it had deleted bad language from programmes on 353

occasions when its use had been gratuitous. That was not applicable to the present

instance however. In reply to Mr Kempson's point that the language used would have

been even more offensive given the year in which the story had been set, TVNZ said its use

at that time heightened the intense distaste and horror felt by the mother and, anyway,

comments which suggested a more pure and wholesome environment in the past were "a

myth". Mr Kempson objected to that observation.

The Authority has explained the context in which the term was used at some length.

While it cannot agree with Mr Kempson that the use of the phrase is totally unacceptable

in all circumstances, it believes that the occasions where its use by a broadcaster is

appropriate are limited. While its use might not have been essential to portray the fury

felt by June on this occasion, as the Authority recorded in Decision No: 164/93 cited by

TVNZ, its use occurred at a pivotal point. Further, its omission would have seriously

hampered the flow of the story being told. The Authority also noted that its use took place

in an "AO" programme and had been preceded by a warning.

Taking these contextual matters into account and having regard to the circumstances in

which the term was used, the Authority concluded that standard G2 had not been

breached on this occasion. It would add that it agreed with Mr Kempson that its use in

1959 could well have been less likely than within a contemporary family, but believed

that its use on this basis added to the dramatic impact of the play.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Iain Gallaway
Chairperson
28 April 1994

Appendix

C M Kempson's Complaint to Television New Zealand Limited

In a letter dated 16 December 1993, Mr Kempson of Waikanae complained to Television

New Zealand Ltd about the drama Xmas for Lou broadcast on TV1's Montana Sunday

Theatre at 8.35pm on 5 December.

Mr Kempson objected to the use of foul language during the broadcast which was watched

by his family. Such language, he added, was totally unacceptable in any circumstances

and contravened the currently accepted norms of decency and taste. Would the

production staff, he asked, use such language in front of their families?

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint

TVNZ advised Mr Kempson of its Complaints Committee's decision in a letter dated 4

February 1994. It reported that the Committee had considered whether the use of

expression "fuck you" in the broadcast contravened standard G2 of the Television Code of

Broadcasting Practice.

Pointing out that standard G2 requires broadcasters to take context into account, TVNZ

described the context in which the phrase was used as a high quality New Zealand drama

about the rivalry between two sisters in their adult life. One sister (Ngaire) returned home

from London while the other (June) had stayed home looking after the child (Lou) who, it

transpired, was in fact Ngaire's offspring. The tension between the meek June and the

fun-loving Ngaire built up and exploded in the phrase complained about. TVNZ added:

It is a scene that is central to the plot - an absolutely integral part of the story for it

is the pivotal moment when June snaps at the realisation that she might lose the

child she has brought up as her own.

Moreover, TVNZ said, the scene could not be deleted as it explained the coldness shown to

June by her mother and was the basis for the fight scene at the beach between the sisters.

TVNZ concluded:

Bearing in mind that G2 specifically acknowledges context, that the programme

was screened well into "AO" time, that it was preceded by a specific warning about

language and that the Montana Sunday Theatre has become established as the

repose of quality modern television drama which reflects the directness and

uninhibited nature of much present day dramatic writing, the committee felt

unable to conclude that any breach of the code had occurred.

C M Kempson's Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's decision, in a Complaint Referral Form dated 22 February 1994,

Mr Kempson referred the complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under

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

TVNZ, he wrote, had ignored the point of his letter. He had not objected to the scene in

which anger had been conveyed but at the language which had been used. While such

language might be the norm in television circles, he added, it was totally unacceptable at

all levels of society. Explaining that he objected to the use of foul language by all

broadcasters, he wrote:

Foul language and violence on television have a big influence on behaviour and

therefore it is very important that we do not become immune to this.

He noted that the play was set some years ago when the language used would have been

even more unacceptable. He also questioned the broadcast of warnings which were used

by the broadcaster to avoid responsibility, adding that he had not in fact seen the start of

the programme.

TVNZ's Response to the Authority

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

letter is dated 28 February 1994 and TVNZ's reply, 7 March.

Rather than reiterating the points made in its reply to Mr Kempson, TVNZ said it would

confine its comments to the remarks in the referral.

It contested the observation that foul language was totally objectionable in all

circumstances, pointing out that the Authority in Decision No: 164/93 had accepted the

use of the word "fuck" in a film in a scene which was pivotal to the comedy's context. In

Xmas for Lou, it argued, the context was different but the language was even more

appropriate to illustrate June's long pent-up emotions.

Explaining that standard G2 allowed context to be taken into account, TVNZ reported that

in 1993 it had deleted 353 examples of gratuitous bad language. However, as it was not

gratuitous in the programme complained about, it had been allowed to remain.

It repeated the points that the broadcast was shown in "AO" time and was preceded by a

warning.

Describing C M Kempson's reference to the higher standards which he said had existed in

the past as a "myth", TVNZ argued that the period in which the film was set was in part

the point as the language caused an immediate freeze between June and her mother and

polarised the family.

C M Kempson's Final Comment to the Authority

When asked to comment on TVNZ's reply, in a letter dated 21 March 1993 Mr Kempson

highlighted two points.

First, he believed that the emphasis should be on public broadcasting - not just on the

programme - and he expressed regret that the Authority had accepted such language in

the past. By citing that decision, he noted, TVNZ was trying to set a trend in the use of

foul language.

Secondly, he objected to TVNZ's comment that the "good old days" were largely a myth.

Referring to his wide variety of experiences, he stated that the "good old days" were not a

myth. However, he added:

I have to admit I have not worked in the television industry where apparently the

use of such language appears to be the norm.

He concluded:

Public broadcasting has a pivotal role to play in education and setting what is

considered "normally accepted" behaviour and language. It is therefore vital that

the BSA is effective in its work.