BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

A repeat of an episode of the series Ren and Stimpy was broadcast at 6.00pm on TV2

on 29 January 1995.

Mrs Daczo complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, about the

segment which parodied breakfast cereal commercials. She said that it was

inappropriate to broadcast such material during family viewing time as it had focussed

on the children's backsides and flatulence.

Maintaining that high fibre breakfast cereals had a reputation for creating flatulence

and that the parody had made the onset of flatulence the cereal's selling point, TVNZ

said that the satire provided amusement for adults and harmless fun for younger

viewers. Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Mrs Daczo referred the complaint to

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

For the reasons below, the Authority declined 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

has determined the complaint without a formal hearing.

Mrs Daczo complained to TVNZ that it was inappropriate to broadcast the Ren and

Stimpy series during family viewing time. Referring to one specific episode, she argued

that the segment which featured the superman-like character focussed unnecessarily

on the children's backsides and on flatulence. Moreover, she described some of the

shots of the super hero's backside as "quite provocative" and noted that a gay men's

association had been acknowledged in the programme's credits.

TVNZ advised Mrs Daczo that it had assessed her complaint under standard G2 of

the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice although at the end of its report to her,

said that standard G12 had not been contravened. To avoid any possibility of

confusion, the Authority has considered the complaint under both standards. 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.

G12 To be mindful of the effect any programme may have on children during

their normally accepted viewing times.

Explaining that at the end of each episode of the Ren and Stimpy animated satirical

series some aspect of modern life was parodied, TVNZ said that the episode

complained about dealt with the pretence used in some commercials. It continued:

We all know the reputation high fibre breakfast cereals have for creating

flatulence, but real commercials never say that. Not so the one on "Ren and

Stimpy" which lampooned the breakfast cereal commercials by making the onset

of flatulence a selling point for the cereal.

It added:

While again we recognise that not all parents will see discussions about

flatulence and breaking wind as a fit subject for children's ears, we do suggest

that for generations most young people have gone through a period where they

find innocent amusement in the workings of the their bodies and the noises that

issue therefrom!

Arguing that the flatulence aspect was not done to excess, TVNZ said that the Ren

and Stimpy series through parody and satire provided amusement for adults and

harmless fun for children. It declined to uphold the complaint.

The reference to the Gay Men's Chorus, TVNZ noted, was to the item's feature

story which included a song which lampooned patriotism.

When she referred her complaint to the Authority, Mrs Daczo said that the series had

a "sick" view of the world and she insisted that the item's focus on backsides and

flatulence breached the standards.

While the Authority did not necessarily accept TVNZ's point that it was widely

known that high fibre breakfast cereals were reputed to create flatulence, it determined

the complaint on the basis of whether or not there was an undue emphasis on either

the characters' backsides or flatulence. Had there been an undue emphasis, it

considered that the standards might be in jeopardy. It also took into account TVNZ's

point that most young children at some stage of their development find amusement

from body noises.

After viewing the item, the Authority understood the reasons why Mrs Daczo and

some other viewers considered aspects of Ren and Stimpy to be crude. However, the

Authority decided that the item complained about was relatively harmless and had not

emphasised backsides or flatulence to the extent which justified upholding the

complaint. Consequently, it had not breached the standards.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Iain Gallaway
Chairperson
12 April 1995

Appendix

Mrs Daczo's Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd - February 1995

Mrs Joanne Daczo of Pirongia complained to Television New Zealand Ltd about the

broadcast of Ren and Stimpy at 6.00pm on January 29 on TV2.

She objected to its broadcast during family viewing time because of its "perverted

slant". She maintained that much of the focus in the segment showing two young

children and a superman-like character was on their behinds and flatulence and, she

said, some views of the adult male's backside were provocative. Further, a gay men's

association was listed in the credits.

Describing the "alleged comedy" as a "bit sick", she requested that it be replaced by a

programme containing a healthy outlook on life.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint - 21 February 1995

TVNZ advised that it had assessed the repeat of an episode of Ren and Stimpy (first

broadcast on 18 June 1994) under standard G2 of the Television Code of Broadcasting

Practice.

TVNZ explained that the series which had been running since 1993 contained "a

flabby feline and cadaverous chihuahua" and each episode usually lampooned some

aspect of life in the 20th century. It continued:

At the end of each adventure, the programme often takes a sharp dig at some

other product of modern civilisation and it was one of these sketches which

caught your attention and prompted your complaint. Just when a viewer might

expect a routine commercial break (the main adventure having been completed)

he or she is instead confronted with an animated parody of a breakfast cereal

commercial.

What the parody sets out to do is to show the pretence in some commercials.

We all know the reputation high fibre cereals have for creating flatulence, but real

commercials never say that. Not so the one on "Ren and Stimpy" which

lampooned the breakfast cereal commercials by making the onset of flatulence a

selling point for the cereal.

While acknowledging that the item might not amuse everyone, TVNZ argued that it

was an acceptable animated satire in the Ren and Stimpy style. It added that children

usually found body noises innocently amusing although not all parents might discuss

flatulence with their children but, it added:

TVNZ does not believe the flatulence aspect was done to excess.

It wrote:

We believe that "Ren and Stimpy" is a series which, through clever parody and

satire, can provide amusement for adults while, at a basic cartoon level, can also

offer harmless fun for younger viewers.

As the credit for the Gay Men's Chorus referred to the main item which involved a

"merciless satire on patriotism", TVNZ stated that it was not relevant to the segment

complained about.

Expressing regret that offence had been taken, TVNZ maintained that the breakfast

commercial sketch would not have an injurious effect on children.

Mrs Daczo's Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - March 1995

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Mrs Daczo referred her complaint to the

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

She objected not only to the scenes complained about but to the unpleasant views of

the world contained in the "whole" cartoon and to its homosexual overtones.

She registered her strong objection about the episode broadcast on 18 February and

referring back to her complaint about the broadcast on 29 January, she asked, if it was

regarded by TVNZ as adult entertainment, why was it not broadcast at a later time?

TVNZ's response to the Authority - 10 March 1995

Noting that its comments were confined to the episode broadcast on 29 January,

TVNZ said it had little to add to its letter of 21 February to Mrs Daczo except to

advise that it could not detect any allusions to homosexuality in the episode

complained about.

As for Mrs Daczo's question, TVNZ quoted its remark to her to indicate:

In other words, this series is like a lot of other animated series which provide

entertainment on two levels - one pitched at the adult viewer, the other at the

children. "The Simpsons" is another example of that type of animated

entertainment.

It concluded:

We emphasise that Mrs Daczo's complaint refers to a specific item within this

episode of "Ren and Stimpy", the parody on the breakfast commercial which is

found towards the end of the programme.

Mrs Daczo's Final Comment - received 22 March 1995

Mrs Daczo repeated her concern about the time that the programme was broadcast.