BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

A Guy Fawkes Day party held on the roof of the TVNZ building in Auckland was

broadcast live on Havoc on MTV on 5 November 1997 beginning at 9.30pm.

Fran Keina complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, that the

combination of fireworks, alcohol and young people was unsafe and a poor example

for the young people at whom the channel is targeted. She questioned the propriety

of having people who appeared to be under the legal age drinking alcohol in public.

TVNZ reassured Ms Keina that extra fire safety devices were installed to ensure the

party proceeded safely. The fireworks, it said, and not the limited supply of beer

consumed, were the focus of the party. It considered the programme contained

appropriate messages about fireworks safety and did not believe the behaviour shown

was irresponsible. Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Ms Keina 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 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). On this occasion, the Authority

determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

Young people who attended a Guy Fawkes night party on the roof of the TVNZ

building were shown enjoying a fireworks display and drinking beer in a live broadcast

on Havoc on MTV on 5 November 1997 between 9.30–10.00pm.

Ms Keina complained that the combination of fireworks, alcohol and young people

was unsafe and that it was irresponsible for TVNZ to permit such a broadcast on a

channel targeted at young people. She regarded the area in which the fireworks were

lit as being very overcrowded, and noted that many of the young people (who

appeared to her to be under age) were drinking beer. In addition, she noted that the

presenters on several occasions had to warn partygoers away from where the

fireworks were being lit. In her view, the fireworks should have been set off under

supervision in order to set a good example for the young people at whom the

programme was targeted. She suggested it would have been a good opportunity for

TVNZ to have broadcast a promotion for the safe use of alcohol and of fireworks.

By way of background, TVNZ explained that Havoc was broadcast nightly on MTV

and that the programme on 5 November was shown live from a Guy Fawkes party

being held at the Television Centre in Central Auckland. The venue was a patio,

covering a substantial area, outside TVNZ's staff cafeteria. It advised that it had

installed extra fire safety devices and called in additional security staff to ensure that

the party proceeded safely. Further, the fireworks were kept in a steel lidded box and

distributed only by the presenter, or one of the programme's producers. TVNZ

emphasised that there was only a limited amount of beer available and that the focus

of the party was on the fireworks and not the drinking. It believed that the mood

captured was that of a genuine youth party being enjoyed by a group of young people

who were guests of the programme. It reassured Ms Keina that the party was not as

out of control as she had imagined it to be. It advised that it had considered the

complaint under standard V11 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice, which

reads:

V11  Any realistic portrayal of anti-social behaviour, including violent and

serious crime and the abuse of liquor and drugs, must not be shown in a

way that glamorises the activities.

TVNZ declined to uphold the complaint.

The Authority first turns its attention to whether the standard selected by TVNZ –

standard V11 – best encompasses the concerns expressed in Ms Keina's complaint. It

notes that her principal concern was that the party showed young people enjoying

fireworks while consuming alcohol, which in her view demonstrated a lack of

responsibility on TVNZ's part, since the programme was targeted at a young

audience. Having examined the Code of Practice, the Authority concludes that no

other standard is more applicable, and agrees with TVNZ's choice of standard V11 as

being the most relevant one to apply. The Authority concludes that the moderate use

of alcohol shown, even in combination with the exuberant behaviour of the presenters,

did not portray anti-social behaviour, at least not in the sense that the standard

envisages. Whether the party set a good example for young people to follow is not a

matter for the Authority. Accordingly, as the standard was not contravened, it

declines to uphold the complaint.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
26 February 1998

Appendix

Fran Keina's Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd – 6 November 1997

Fran Keina of Christchurch complained to Television New Zealand Ltd about the live

broadcast of a Guy Fawkes party on MTV on 5 November 1997 beginning at 9.30pm.

She noted that the party was held in the central city and expressed her concern that

fireworks were being lit by both presenters and spectators in an area which appeared

too crowded to make it safe. She also expressed concern that many of the crowd were

drinking beer, including some of the spectators who appeared to be under the legal

drinking age.

When Ms Keina contacted TVNZ, she considered she was treated in an offhand

manner and was assured that the fact that there were fire extinguishers present should

have been enough to allay her fears.

She stated that her specific concerns were:

1.  Should fireworks be used in a public place without some rules or supervision,

or just plain common sense being observed?

2.  Should people (of any age) appear to be drinking alcohol in a public place

while being watched on TV and when using fireworks?

3.  Should television broadcasters take some responsibility for the influence they

exert on their audience?

4.  Should not a television broadcaster use such an opportunity to promote the

safe use of both fireworks and alcohol?

Ms Keina said that she realised the audience of young people would not tune in to a

station which patronised them. She added that she did not feel that it was the

responsibility of the broadcaster to bring up children. Nevertheless she felt that they

should recognise the influence that their programming had on people.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint – 2 December 1997

TVNZ noted that the programme Havoc was broadcast nightly on MTV, and featured

personalities Mikey Havoc and Newsboy and was aimed at a youth audience and

reflected youth values and interests. The programme in question was broadcast live

from a Guy Fawkes party being held at the Television Centre in Central Auckland.

First, TVNZ explained the setting for the party. It was held on a large patio covering

a substantial area outside TVNZ's staff cafeteria. It emphasised that it was a

considerably larger area than many a backyard where similar Guy Fawkes parties were

being held. The patio has a concrete surface and was well away from flammable

objects. The proximity to the Sky Tower, TVNZ explained, was more apparent than

real, since the TVNZ building was separated from the Tower by a four lane road, and

the patio is on the western side of the TV Centre, farthest from the Tower.

TVNZ also explained that it installed extra fire safety devices and had extra security

staff to ensure that the party proceeded safely. None of its fire detection equipment

was activated during the evening. The fireworks, it noted, were contained in a steel

lidded box.

There was a limited supply of beer available during the evening, but the focus was on

the fireworks, not on the drinking, TVNZ continued. On the matter of safety, TVNZ

pointed out that the host repeatedly urged the partygoers to back off from the

fireworks, and noted that the fireworks were let off in a cleared area with the guests

standing back at an appropriate distance.

TVNZ suggested that the programme contained appropriate messages with regard to

fireworks safety. Observing that some of the fireworks used were now no longer sold

here, it noted that the presenter emphasised that selling them now was illegal. It

suggested these were all positive messages to the young audience.

As far as drinking the beer was concerned, TVNZ considered that the mood captured

was that of a genuine youth party being enjoyed by a group of young people who

were guests of the programme. It hoped that it had reassured Ms Keina that the party

was not as "out of control" as she had imagined it to be.

TVNZ did not consider any broadcasting standards had been breached.

Ms Keina's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 7 January 1998

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

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

Ms Keina began by explaining that the location of the party was not an issue, and that

the only reason she had referred to the Sky Tower in her letter was to ensure that the

programme concerned could be identified.

She said she was reassured to know that extra staff and safety devices were on hand,

but was concerned that they were not seen to have been available. She suggested that

it would have been helpful to have seen one or two fire extinguishers in the

background. She was further reassured that the fireworks were in a steel lidded box.

However, she noted, this was not apparent during the programme and another

opportunity to demonstrate to viewers the responsible manner in which the party

was being held was lost.

Referring to the apparent proximity of the partygoers to the fireworks, she accepted

that camera angles could be deceiving and make things seem closer to the camera than

they actually were. However, her point was that some viewers would not have

understood that, and would have thought the partygoers were standing as close to the

fireworks as it seemed they were. She wrote:

If [TVNZ] contests the event was carried out in a responsible manner I would

be interested in [its] interpretation of the event in which two Barbie dolls were

sat on the arm of a couch to which a firework was also attached and set alight.

I would be very interested in how [TVNZ] could possibly justify such actions

as being responsible use of fireworks.

She noted that young people were impressionable and tended to ape the behaviour of

others, doing things which were detrimental to their health. She concluded:

In short it is the manner in which this event appeared to be conducted, how

those appearances could be deceiving and the responsibility TVNZ should

take with regard to how its programming influences its audience intentionally

or otherwise which I question.

Ms Keina noted that there was no standard in the Code of Practice which referred to

the responsible depiction of actions which could cause injury. She suggested that such

a code could be considered.

TVNZ's Response to the Authority – 15 January 1998

TVNZ suggested that Ms Keina may have overlooked the point that the programme's

intention was to take MTV's youthful audience along to a party, and it was never

intended that it should be a lesson on fireworks safety.

With respect to her suggestion that it was an opportunity lost to promote fireworks

safety, TVNZ noted that there had been many programmes over the years dealing

with fireworks safety, but that did not mean that every programme dealing with

fireworks had to contain warnings. It added:

This was a party, exuberantly but safely played out in a large open concrete

space in central Auckland.

Referring to the lighting of a firework close to the Barbie dolls, TVNZ noted that Ms

Keina did not explain why she considered this scene a threat, and it pointed out that

nothing ill became of it.

Ms Keina's Final Comment – 28 January 1998

Ms Keina wrote that she agreed with TVNZ that the programme was not an

appropriate forum for preaching to viewers, but she believed that it knew she did not

expect it to be a lesson on fireworks safety. In her view, the programme should have

demonstrated the safe use of fireworks through the actions of its partygoers.

Referring to the Barbie dolls on the couch, she asked, just because nobody was hurt

(other than the dolls), did that make it OK?

She concluded:

Further does the fact that other media and television programmes deal with

firework safety, absolve the producers of this programme from demonstrating

a responsible attitude?