BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary

A documentary about the naturist movement in New Zealand, entitled Inside New Zealand: Nude Zealand, was broadcast on TV3 on 16 June 1999, commencing at 8.30 pm. It contained footage of naked men and women, including breasts and male genitalia.

Kristian Harang complained to TV3 Network Services Limited, the broadcaster, that the broadcast portrayed nudity as normal, whereas very few people in New Zealand were nudists and many would object to nudity being screened in their homes. The numerous scenes of naked men and women, and male genitals, in family viewing time would have a detrimental effect on children and young people, he wrote.

TV3 responded that the documentary was preceded by a written and verbal warning, and screened in AO time. The programme’s depiction of nudity was innocent and non-sexual, it wrote, and portrayed the naturists’ bodies matter-of-factly. The nudity depicted was not titillating or exploitative, it stressed, and it declined to uphold the complaint.

Dissatisfied with TV3’s response, Mr Harang referred his complaint 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 complaint.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed a tape of the item complained about, and have read the correspondence which is listed in the Appendix. On this occasion, the Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

Inside New Zealand: Nude Zealand, a documentary about the lifestyle of naturists, was broadcast by TV3 on 16 June. The broadcast contained interviews with and footage of naked men and women, and included many shots of women’s breasts, and male genitalia. Mr Harang complained that it was a "criminal offence" to be naked in public, and the effect of the programme on children and young people would be to regard nudity as normal. In prime family viewing time, he wrote, it was offensive to view naked men and women.

TV3 considered the complaint in the context of standards G2 and G12 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice, which had been nominated by Mr Harang. The standards 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 broadcaster stressed that the programme was rated AO, it was preceded by a written and verbal warning that it contained "frequent nudity which may offend some viewers", and it was broadcast in AO time, commencing at 8.30 pm. It then observed that the:

…depiction of the naturists and the nudity shown was innocent and non-sexual, with the naturists’ bodies being portrayed as matter-of-fact not as objects for titillation.

TV3 declined to uphold a breach of standard G2, arguing that a number of Broadcasting Standards Authority decisions had ruled that non-sexual nudity was appropriate to screen on television. Furthermore, it emphasised, the non-sexual nudity which was shown accurately portrayed the lifestyle of the naturists, in the context of an AO programme which contained a warning about the nudity within it.

The broadcaster also declined to uphold the complaint under standard G12, noting that the programme was rated AO and was screened after 8.30 pm, which was not the normally accepted viewing time of children. The nudity shown was in the context of a programme about the naturist community, it was not titillating or exploitative, both genders were shown at all stages of life, and with proper respect for their human dignity, it wrote. In those circumstances, TV3 submitted, the footage would not have caused harm to a child viewer.

In a final comment, Mr Harang denied that the programme could have a positive effect on viewers. "It is a criminal offence to be nude in public, and that type of programme actually encourages nudity…", he wrote, observing that this had been the first time he had seen a naked man’s genitals exposed on television.

The Authority’s Findings

In assessing a complaint alleging a breach of the good taste standard, the Authority is required first to reflect community expectations of decency and taste, and, secondly, to bear in mind the context in which the image or language was portrayed. In this instance, it acknowledges that the images of naked people, which included women’s breasts and men’s genitalia, may be distasteful to some, including the complainant, but it does not consider that there is a widespread view that the images would breach the standard. It notes, in particular, that the footage was obtained in the private setting of the naturists’ "club", where the members were shown participating in what were, for them, ordinary outdoor pursuits. The footage was non-sexualised and inoffensive, and the Authority considers that its broadcast was entirely relevant to the documentary.

The Authority next notes the contextual framework in which the programme was broadcast, as it is required to do by the standard. The programme was preceded by a clear visual and verbal warning that it contained "frequent nudity which may offend some viewers", and it commenced broadcast at 8.30 pm. That time, the Authority observes, is the time at which Adults Only programming may commence. The programme could be described as a lifestyle documentary which explored the non-sexualised pursuits of a group of people holding common views about nudity. It presented those views, and its accompanying footage, in a non-exploitative manner. Those factors lead the Authority to conclude that the content did not exceed community expectations of taste and decency. The Authority accepts as sound the argument advanced by TV3 to Mr Harang that the programme handled a difficult subject matter appropriately. It declines to uphold the complaint under standard G2.

Next, the Authority considers the complaint under standard G12. That standard requires broadcasters to be mindful of the effect of a programme on children during their normally accepted viewing times. Here, the Authority observes, the programme commenced broadcast at 8.30 pm. That time-slot allows the broadcast of programmes containing adult themes, or those which would be unsuitable for children under 18 years of age. Taking into account the time-slot, the broadcaster’s warning which preceded the programme and the factors which the Authority has outlined in its consideration of standard G2, the Authority is satisfied that the broadcaster complied with its obligations under the standard. It notes Mr Harang’s reference to the Authority’s Decision (No. 1999-066). That decision, Mr Harang wrote, upheld a complaint that a film about striptease performers was offensive to children in "prime time family viewing time" from 8.30-9.00 pm. In that Decision, the Authority referred to the film’s explicit portrayal of the degradation of women in a sleazy adult world and, observing that such adult material was on screen within 15 minutes of the commencement of the 8.30 pm watershed on a Sunday evening, it considered that children had a right to be protected from such portrayals. In those quite specific circumstances, the Authority noted that the film was inappropriately placed in its time-slot. Here, the Authority is satisfied that the lifestyle documentary nature of the item, and the non-sexualised and inoffensive manner in which the footage was broadcast, combined to present a programme which would not have had an adverse impact upon any children viewing it. It declines to uphold the complaint under standard G12.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
23 September 1999

Appendix

The following correspondence was received and considered by the Authority when it determined this complaint:

1. Kristian Harang’s Complaint to TV3 Network Services Limited – 16 June 1999

2. Mr Harang’s Letter to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 13 July 1999

3. TV3’s Response to the Formal Complaint – 19 July 1999

4. Mr Harang’s Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 19 July 1999

5. TV3’s Response to the Authority – 28 July 1999

6. Mr Harang’s Final Comment to the Authority – 2 August 1999