BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

Damned in the USA was the title of a documentary screened on CTV at 8.30pm on

Sunday 26 March !995. It examined the views of different groups in the debate about

art as opposed to pornography.

Mr Preston complained to Canterbury Television Ltd that some of the material shown

was pornographic and should not have been screened.

Acknowledging that the programme included some "raw images" to illustrate the

debate, CTV said that they were acceptable in that context. Dissatisfied with CTV's

decision, Mr Preston 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 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.

Different approaches to censoring artistic works in the United States were considered

in a documentary entitled Damned in the USA screened by CTV at 8.30pm on 26

March. The work of a number of artists was shown and comments advanced from a

range of perspectives.

Mr Preston complained to CTV that some of Robert Mapplethorpe's photographs

which were portrayed were pornographic and should not have been screened on

television. In response, CTV acknowledged that the programme included some "raw

images" but maintained that they were appropriate in the context of the programme - a

serious debate about the distinction between art and pornography. CTV added that

the programme had won an International Emmy Award for the best Arts

Documentary in 1991.

When he referred his complaint to the Authority, Mr Preston referred to some

specific photographs which, he maintained, were offensive and pornographic.

As Mr Preston did not nominate a standard allegedly transgressed when he

complained to CTV, the responsibility was on the broadcaster to do so. CTV failed

to meet that obligation. In view of the correspondence, the Authority has assessed

the complaint under standard G2 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. It

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.

In referring to the context in which the programme was broadcast, CTV did not refer

either to the programme's classification or to the hour at which it was screened.

According to the programme listings in the "Listener", Damned in the USA was

classified as "G" or "General" by CTV. That classification reads:

General - G

Programmes which exclude material more suited to adult audiences but not

necessarily unsuitable for child viewers when subject to the guidance of a parent

or adult.

"G" programmes may be screened at any time.

The Authority was of the opinion that this classification was inappropriate in view of

the programme's contents and believed that it should have been classified as "AO".

The possible impact of the broadcaster's apparent inappropriate classification,

however, was ameliorated in view of the fact that the programme was broadcast at

8.30pm – an "AO" timeslot.

On the basis that the programme was screened at 8.30pm, the Authority was required

to assess whether it complied with standard G2. Having watched the programme, the

Authority appreciated that there were a number of images advanced which a viewer

might well maintain were in breach of standard G2. Indeed, had the images been

shown in a prurient way, the Authority would have agreed that the programme had

contravened the standard.

However, standard G2 requires that "context" be considered. The context in which

Robert Mapplethorpe's photographs were shown was a serious arts programme in

which views from a wide range of different perspectives were expressed. Moreover,

they were advanced with balance and, with minimal bias, viewers were asked to decide

for themselves, first, whether the art work shown was or was not pornography, and

secondly, whether the artists should or should not receive public assistance.

Given that the programme broadcast in an "AO" timeslot dealt with a controversial

issue in a legitimate, fair and honest manner which did not involve titillation, the

Authority considered that, in this context, standard G2 was not breached.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Judith Potter
Chairperson
27 July 1995

Appendix

Mr Preston's Complaint to Canterbury Television Limited - 31 March 1995

Mr Ian Preston of Christchurch complained to Canterbury Television Limited

(through the Broadcasting Standards Authority) about the broadcast at 8.30pm on

Sunday 26 March of a programme called Damned in the USA. The programme, he

wrote, was "quite sick and/or pornographic" and should not have been shown on

television.

CTV's Response to the Formal Complaint - 24 April 1995

In its response to Mr Preston's complaint, CTV said that it was sorry that he had

found fault with the programme.

Describing the programme as a documentary, CTV said it was designed to explain the

on-going conflict in the United States between religious fundamentalists and artists,

feminists, homosexuals and other minority groups who held opposing views in the art

versus pornography debate.

The programme did include raw images, CTV agreed, but these were in context and

were not intended to titillate but to present enough information for intelligent viewers

to draw their own conclusions as to the merits of the arguments.

As the programme had won an International Emmy Award for Best Arts

Documentary in 1991, CTV argued that it was suitable viewing for a mature and

intelligent audience.

Mr Preston's Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 18 May

1995

Dissatisfied with CTV's response, Mr Preston referred his complaint to the

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

contended that the scenes he had complained about had no place on the country's

television screens.

CTV's Report to the Authority - 30 May 1995

CTV had nothing to add in its response to the Authority when advised that Mr

Preston had referred his complaint.