BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

A young man having body paint applied, and then walking through a shopping centre

clad in his underwear, body paint and high heel shoes, was shown as one of the items

on Who Dares Wins. The programme was broadcast at 7.30pm on TV2 on 10 July

1997 and a promo was broadcast earlier that evening.

Ms McBride complained to the broadcaster, Television New Zealand Ltd, that the

item breached the standards relating to good taste and decency, and being mindful of

children. She also complained that some of the sequence, which was included in the

promo broadcast earlier in the evening, breached the standards relating to the use of

out of context sequences in promos.

Explaining that the programme's humour was at least partly based on the discomfort

shown by the embarrassed volunteers, TVNZ maintained that none of the sequences

complained about breached the nominated standards.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's decision, Ms McBride referred her complaints 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 complaints.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed the items complained about and have read

the correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). On this occasion, the Authority

determines the complaints without a formal hearing.

A young man was dared to walk through a busy shopping centre clad only in his

underwear, body paint and high heeled shoes in the programme Who Dares Wins

broadcast on TV2 on 10 July 1997 at 7.30pm.

Ms McBride of Rotorua complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster,

that the item was offensive and unsuitable for broadcast during a time when children

would be watching. In addition, she complained that the incident, when extracted for

the purpose of promoting the programme, breached standard G24.

TVNZ advised that it examined the complaint under the standards nominated by Ms

McBride. Standards G2 and G12 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.

The other standard reads:

G24   Broadcasters must be mindful that scenes containing incidents of

violence or other explicit material may be acceptable when seen in the

total context of a programme, but when extracted for promotion

purposes such incidents will be seen out of context and may thereby be

unacceptable, not only in terms of the codes but also for the time band

during which the trailer is placed.

Having reviewed the programme, TVNZ observed that the sequence showed the

young man volunteering for the dare, having body paint applied, and struggling to

cope with the high heels as he made his way through the shopping centre. In terms of

decency and good taste, TVNZ pointed out that the man was never clad in anything

less than his underpants. It did not accept Ms McBride's view that the man's state

of undress went beyond accepted norms.

TVNZ rejected the contention that children could be harmed by watching such

material and, on the question of the promo for the programme, responded that it found

the subject matter to be so innocuous that it was no threat to the requirements of

standard G24.

In TVNZ's view, Ms McBride's complaints suggested that she was stating a "viewer

preference" because she did not like programmes in which men were embarrassed in

this way. It drew attention to s.5(c) of the Broadcasting Act 1989 which reads:

s.5(c) Complaints based merely on a complainant's preferences are not, in

general, capable of being resolved by a complaints procedure.

TVNZ suggested that the section was relevant to these complaints and declined to

uphold them.

The Authority refers to Decision No: 1997-106 dated 21 August 1997 in which it

dealt with a complaint from Ms McBride about the same programme. In that decision

it wrote:

While the Authority agrees that the content of the programmes is not to

everyone's taste, it does not find any aspect of the three items complained

about which breaches any of the broadcasting standards cited. As TVNZ

noted, there was no impropriety or indecency, and nothing which would harm

children who may be watching.

That reasoning applies to this complaint in respect of the alleged breaches of

standards G2 and G12. Turning to the alleged breach of standard G24 in the promo,

the Authority concludes that it is not relevant because the scenes previewed did not

contain any material which could be described as "explicit" and thus in breach of the

standard.

For the reasons set forth above, the Authority declines to uphold the

complaints.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
18 September 1997

Appendix

Ms McBride's Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd – 14 July 1997

Michelle McBride of Rotorua complained to Television New Zealand Ltd about an

item broadcast on TV2's Who Dares Wins on 10 July 1997 at 7.30pm.

The item concerned a challenge for someone to bare their buttocks while in a shopping

mall which, Ms McBride said, breached standards G2 and G12 of the Television Code

of Broadcasting Practice. As the segment was used in a promo broadcast at least twice

between 7.00–7.30pm, Ms McBride contended that it involved, in addition, a breach

of standard G24.

In the expectation that TVNZ would call her views of the programme "mistaken", Ms

McBride pointed out that making formal complaints was one way viewers were able

to influence programme standards.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint – 30 July 1997

Assessing the complaint under the nominated standards, TVNZ explained that the

programme made embarrassing dares to volunteers, and their discomfort was the

source of much of the programme's humour. It continued:

Your objection was to a sequence in which a young man accepts a dare to walk

through a busy shopping centre clad in his underwear, body paint and high

heel shoes. You thought the sequence fell outside the bounds of taste and

decency and that it should not have been shown at a time when children might

be expected to be watching.

TVNZ said that young man, in an embarrassed way, made his way through the

shopping centre. As there was no nudity, TVNZ did not accept that standard G2 had

been breached. As it saw no harm to children who watched the sequence, it did not

accept that standard G12 had been contravened. It reached a similar conclusion in

regard to standard G24, and described the subject matter in the promo as "innocuous".

In response to Ms McBride's point about formal complaints, TVNZ wrote:

We note your reference to the Broadcasting Act and record that we

wholeheartedly endorse the right of viewers to identify breaches of programme

standards when they occur and to complaint about them. TVNZ

acknowledges its responsibility for complying with and maintaining the

standards. It has proven ready to uphold formal complaints on many

occasions when a breach of standards has been revealed.

With respect we do not believe that your complaint has revealed a breach in

standards. Indeed we submit that the tenor of your letter suggests rather that

you are expressing a "viewer preference" - you do not like programmes in

which men are embarrassed this way. A viewer preference is quite different

from a breach in standards, and the Broadcasting Act recognises this by

observing in section 5(c) that "complaints based merely on a complainant's

preferences are not, in general, capable of being resolved by a complaints

procedure.

Ms McBride's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 12 August

1997

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Ms McBride referred her complaint to the

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

Because of the crude nature of the dares shown in the programme, which seemed to

target men, Ms McBride maintained that the broadcasting standards had been

breached. Inappropriate undressing, she observed, could be dangerous for children.

Referring to her experience with the complaints process, she did not accept TVNZ's

contention that it was ready to uphold formal complaints.

TVNZ's Response to the Authority – 17 August 1997

TVNZ said that it had nothing to add to its earlier response to the complaint.

It added that it had upheld eight complaints in the previous three weeks, commenting:

Noting the postscript in Ms McBride's letter of referral, we wish to record

that TVNZ regularly upholds formal complaints when it finds a breach of

standards proven. It has upheld eight complaints in the past three weeks.

That Ms McBride's are not among them reflects our view that her complaints

do not demonstrate breaches of the standards but are rather expressions of a

"complainant's preferences" as mentioned in Section 5(c) of the Broadcasting

Act.