BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary

Excerpts from a cricket game a Pukekura Park in New Plymouth involving the visiting

English cricket team were shown in an item of sports news included on One Network

News broadcast between 6.00–7.00pm on 10 January 1997.

GALA's Complaints Secretary (Cliff Turner) complained to Television New Zealand

Ltd, the broadcaster, that the frequent appearance during the item of a hoarding

advertising DB Draught Beer breached the standards prohibiting the saturation of

liquor promotions, and requiring the minimisation of incidental liquor promotion.

Maintaining that viewers would barely be aware of the glimpses of the permanent

hoarding during the extracts which showed the action during the game, TVNZ declined

to uphold the complaint.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's decision, on GALA's behalf Mr Turner referred the

complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting

Act 1989.

For the reasons below, a majority of 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.

Some of the play between the visiting English cricket team and an Academy Eleven

was shown during an item of sports news broadcast on One Network News on 10

January 1997. Mr Cliff Turner, GALA's Complaints Secretary, complained to

TVNZ that the frequent appearance of a hoarding advertising DB beer during the shots

of the game breached the standards relating to the need to avoid the saturation of liquor

promotions, and the requirement to ensure that the incidental promotion of liquor was

minimised.

TVNZ assessed his complaint under the nominated standards in the Television Code

of Broadcasting Practice – A1 and A3. They read:

A1   Saturation of liquor promotions, separately or in combination, must be

avoided

A3   Broadcasters will ensure that the incidental promotion of liquor is

minimised.

TVNZ explained that the traditional position for a single camera at a cricket match was

either at long off or long on to ensure that the shots included a range of action. The

camera's position, TVNZ advised, was not related to the placement of the brewery

signage. Moreover, given the obvious state of disrepair of the hoarding in the

background on this occasion, TVNZ argued that it was not sited for the particular

game, but was a permanent feature at the ground. Dealing with the specific aspects of

the complaint, TVNZ denied that the signage dominated the viewing period in

contravention of standard A1. As for standard A3, TVNZ pointed out that the

standard did not require the total elimination of liquor promotions. Furthermore, it did

not accept that the coverage of the signage was sufficiently extensive to threaten the

standard. Overall, TVNZ contended that the attention of viewers would be drawn to

the action of the players in the foreground.

When he referred GALA's complaint to the Authority, Mr Turner argued that the sign

was placed to ensure maximum exposure. He also sent the Authority a tape of

TVNZ's news coverage of another game involving the English cricket team where,

because of the camera techniques employed, he stated that standards A1 and A3 were

not in jeopardy.

The alleged breach of standard A1 is the issue the Authority assesses first. Because of

the background nature of the liquor signage, it is of the opinion that the saturation

prohibition in standard A1 was not contravened.

The Authority is divided in its decision on the standard A3 aspect of the complaint.

The majority agrees with TVNZ that the focus was clearly on the cricket game and the

actions of the players. The majority considers that, because of the focus of the

coverage which showed significant events from the game, the background hoarding was

barely noticeable.

The minority disagrees. It acknowledges that the principal focus was on the action in

the cricket game but, in addition, it considers that the hoarding was intrusive because

of the frequency with which it was seen. Accordingly, the minority does not accept

that the incidental promotion of liquor was minimised.

For the reasons above, a majority of the Authority declines to uphold the

complaint.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Judith Potter
Chairperson
21 April 1997

Appendix

GALA's Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd - 12 January 1997

Cliff Turner, GALA's Complaints Secretary, complained to Television New Zealand

Ltd about an item of sports news broadcast on One Network News between 6.00 -

7.00pm on 10 January 1997.

The item involved a cricket match played by the visiting English team in New

Plymouth and, Mr Turner wrote, a large advertisement for DB Draught beer was seen

on several occasions. He argued that it amounted to breaches of standards A1 and A3

of the Television Code.

Mr Turner also mentioned Guideline 8 of the standards which referred to liquor

promotions which were a normal feature of the situation being televised. However, he

questioned its applicability as the sign seen during the item appeared to have been put

in place especially for the game and thus, he wrote, could not be considered a normal

feature.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint - 29 January 1997

Explaining that the sign complained about was a boundary hoarding which was visible

in some shots, TVNZ's Programme Standards Manager (David Edmunds) assessed the

complaint under the nominated standards. He wrote:

Before addressing the two standards directly I should advise that the traditional

position for a single camera covering cricket matches for news is either at deep

long off or deep long on (which side is chosen will depend on such factors as the

light, the terrain, the length of the boundary etc). A camera in that position will

acquire an action shot of the bowler running in, the batsman receiving, and the

reaction of the slip and close-in fielders. That was the reason the camera was

positioned as it was; its position was not related to the placement of the

brewery signage.

Because the glimpses of the sign were incidental to the action during the game, TVNZ

did not accept that the coverage breached the requirement in standard A1. It argued

that the average viewer watched the cricket and did not study the background.

As for the minimisation requirement in standard A3, TVNZ maintained that the

coverage was not extensive - referring to the wording contained in the Guideline.

Noting that standard A3 did not require the total exclusion of incidental promotions

which were normal features, TVNZ maintained that advertising hoardings around the

Pukekura Park boundary were a normal feature. Declining to uphold the complaint,

TVNZ commented:

You have ventured the view that the sign was placed especially for this match.

We do not know whether that was the case (though the sign's obvious state of

disrepair might suggest otherwise) and we do not think it a matter relevant in

assessing the programme standard. The fact is that it was a normal feature of

this particular situation - that is, this specific cricket match being filmed.

GALA's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 18 February 1997

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Mr Turner, on GALA's behalf, referred the

complaint generally to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the

Broadcasting Act 1989.

Mr Turner specifically disagreed with TVNZ's comment that the average viewer

would not have supported a complaint about saturation because of the background

nature of the hoarding. He wrote:

The DB advertisement could not have been missed by a normally-sighted

viewer.

There were few signs around the ground. Two signs, the DB sign and one

adjacent to it, were so well placed for maximum exposure that it seems to me

highly possible that they could have been placed after the camera position had

been decided upon.

The DB sign was seen at least ten times in a news item lasting about 1 minute

for five seconds. I believe that so much exposure amounts to saturation.

He acknowledged that the sign showed signs of "wear and tear" but said that remedial

attention to it was also apparent. He said that similar coverage of a later cricket game

in Wanganui could show how different techniques used by the camera operators, as

had occurred on that occasion, could minimise incidental liquor promotion.

In a further letter dated 18 February, Mr Turner sent the Authority a tape containing

two sports news items from a subsequent cricket match involving the English team

which showed how incidental liquor advertising could be minimised.

TVNZ's Report to the Authority - 28 February 1997

TVNZ advised that it did not want to comment further.