BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary

A promo for South Park contained a "news update" in which police had asked, "If you see this little eight year old boy, kill him and immediately burn his body". The promo was broadcast at 9.40 pm and 10.15 pm on TV4 on 5 April 1998. An episode of South Park broadcast on TV4 on 6 April at 9.30 pm contained fart and diarrhoea jokes.

Ms O’Brien complained to the broadcaster, TV3 Network Services Limited, that the promo incited violence and murder of children, failed to maintain law and order, failed to observe good taste and decency, and discriminated against a young boy. She also complained that puerile descriptions of faeces and related bodily functions were not comedy, and the episode was in breach of good taste and decency.

TV3 responded that South Park was a satirical cartoon, usually rated AO, and easily recognisable by its audience as not to be taken seriously. Noting that it was aimed at adults and screened well past the AO watershed, it declined to uphold the complaints.

Dissatisfied with TV3’s response, Ms O’Brien 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 watched a tape of the items complained about, and have read the correspondence (which is summarised in the Appendix). On this occasion, the Authority determines the complaints without a formal hearing.

A promo for South Park was broadcast at 9.40 pm and 10.15 pm on TV4 on 5 April 1998. The promo, in the form of a "news update", reported that police had asked "If you see this little eight year old boy, kill him and immediately burn his body".

Ms O’Brien of Christchurch complained that in broadcasting the promo TV3 Network Services Limited, the broadcaster, had incited the violence and murder of children, failed to maintain law and order, failed to observe good taste and decency, and discriminated against a young boy.

An episode of South Park was broadcast at 9.30 pm on TV4 on 6 April 1998 and contained fart and diarrhoea jokes. Ms O’Brien complained to the broadcaster that in broadcasting the episode, it had breached the standards of good taste and decency.

TV3 considered the complaints concerning the promo and the episode under standard G2 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. That standard 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.

The broadcaster also considered the promo under standards G5 and G13 of the Code of Broadcasting Practice. They require broadcasters:

G5 To respect the principles of law which sustain our society.

G13 To avoid portraying people in a way which represents as inherently inferior, or is likely to encourage discrimination against, any section of the community on account of sex, race, age, disability, occupational status, sexual orientation or the holding of any religious, cultural or political belief. This requirement is not intended to prevent the broadcast of material which is:

i) factual, or

ii) the expression of genuinely-held opinion in a news or current affairs programme, or

iii) in the legitimate context of a humorous, satirical or dramatic work.

TV3 responded to the complainant that the promo had been rated Adults Only (AO) by the broadcaster’s appraisers and had been broadcast accordingly at 9.40 pm and 10.15 pm during an Adults Only movie. The episode complained about, it wrote, was also rated AO and had been screened an hour after the commencement of the Adults Only watershed. Further, the broadcaster emphasised that South Park was a satirical cartoon which was usually rated AO because it contained adult themes which would be unsuitable for persons under 18 years of age.

Declining to uphold a breach of standard G2 by the promo, TV3 emphasised that the promo’s "news update" would be easily recognised by the audience as comedy and not as reality. The promo, it wrote, contained parts of different episodes and was not part of the episode about which Ms O’Brien complained. The compiled nature of the promo would not have led to any perception that what was shown should be taken seriously, it contended. The broadcaster concluded by referring to the context within which the promo was screened – well past the AO watershed and within an AO-rated programme.

TV3 equally declined to uphold a breach of standard G2 by the screening of the episode, referring to its context of an adults-only, obviously satirical programme which screened after 9.30 pm. The fart and diarrhoea jokes, it contended, were not only acceptable in that context, but crucial to the humour of the storylines promoted by the programme.

The broadcaster treated the second and third aspects of the complaint about the promo in the context of standard G5. In declining to uphold a breach of that standard, it emphasised that the programme was a cartoon aimed at adults which relied on "satirising social mores and habits for comedic effect". It denied that the series could be viewed as reality or that the promo incited the murder of children, particularly in view of the "non-realistic feel" of the footage.

In considering the complainant’s reference to discrimination against a young boy, TV3 referred to standard G13. That standard, it stressed, originated to protect groups of people from being exposed to harm or ridicule when broadcasts represented those groups as inferior. Here, it emphasised, the "boy" in the promo could not have been discriminated against for he was a fictitious cartoon character in a comedy series. In addition, he was a sympathetic character whom the audience "would be more inclined to like than discriminate against", it wrote. In declining to uphold the complaint under G13, TV3 noted that the promo was exempt, in any event, under G13(iii) as a "humorous, satirical or dramatic work".

In its consideration of the complaints, the Authority does not accept that there is any real question of a breach of the cited standards. Firstly, it does not consider that standard G13 is apposite in this case. There was no portrayal of the boy in a way which offended the standard, and in any event, the complaint, the Authority believes, is answered by the application of standard G13(iii). Equally, in its consideration of standard G5 to the promo, the Authority concludes that the standard has not been breached. The statement complained about was made in the context of a cartoon with significant satirical content. It was not and could not be interpreted as a serious invitation to breach the law.

In the Authority’s view, standard G2 is the most relevant standard for the consideration of the complaints about the promo and the episode. In considering whether the depictions complained of might have offended currently accepted norms of decency and taste in language and behaviour, the Authority, as it is required to do, looks to the context in which the depictions occurred.

Here, the programme was an adult cartoon designed for a media-literate audience who recognise the satirical techniques it uses to challenge social values. Some of those techniques are deliberately provocative, and rely on the audience’s familiarity with programme conventions. At other times, they test the boundaries of good taste and decency, often with an anarchic intention, but equally with a view to challenging the basis of conventional attitudes. All of this is valid within the context of humour. The Authority agrees that some material in this episode and the promo could be objectionable if it were taken literally. However, this is a series which knowingly provokes its audience and has a clear satirical intent. Thus the announcement to "kill this child" relies on its audience’s appreciation and knowledge of the satirical and absurd themes of the series. Its treatment of objectionable material – faeces and related bodily functions – was an example of an extreme means of challenging attitudes towards obscenity. It was designed both to disgust and to amuse, and the tension between these responses was the basis of its humour.

In both instances, the Authority finds that the context of the depictions provides an answer to the complaint. Both the promo and the episode were rated Adults Only, which refers to programmes containing adult themes and is restricted to screening after 8.30 pm. Here, the broadcast occurred well after that "watershed" hour, contained the appropriate ratings and, in the case of the episode of South Park, it was also preceded by a warning. In all the circumstances, the Authority is unable to find that the broadcast of the promo and the episode breached the cited standards. Accordingly, it declines to uphold the complaints.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
20 August 1998

Appendix

Margaret O’Brien’s Complaints to TV3 Network Services Ltd – 23 April 1998

Ms O’Brien of Christchurch complained to TV4 about a promo for the programme South Park broadcast during the movie Are You Lonesome Tonight between 9.40 pm and 10.15 pm on Sunday 5 April 1998. She observed that the promo (in the form of a "news update"):

…stated that police asked "If you see this little eight year old boy, kill him and immediately burn his body".

The complainant alleged that the broadcast of the promo:

Incited violence towards and murder of children

Failed in responsibility to maintain law and order

Failed in the observance of good taste and decency

Discriminated against a young boy.

Ms O’Brien also complained to TV4 about an episode of South Park broadcast on Monday 6 April between 9.30-10.00 pm. She contended that:

Thirty minutes of various puerile descriptions of faeces and related bodily functions is not comedy. I consider that the programme cited was totally unsuitable for broadcasting.

In conclusion, the complainant wrote that the episode breached the broadcasting standards of good taste and decency.

TV3’s Response to the Formal Complaint – 20 May 1998

TV3 Network Services Limited, the broadcaster of TV4, considered the complaints under standards G2, G5 and G13 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice.

The broadcaster initially considered the complaint concerning the promo. It responded that the promo was rated AO by its appraisers and screened at 9.40 pm and 10.15 pm during an AO-rated movie. It noted that the programme South Park was a satirical cartoon which was usually rated AO and was enjoyed by many viewers.

TV3 declined to find anything unacceptable in the promo. It wrote that South Park:

…is becoming well known for its satirical elements and the "South Park" promo would be easily recognised by the audience as satire or comedy and not as reality. The "news update"…would be recognised as a joke. The promo complained about contained parts of different episodes…[TV3] does not consider that the compiled nature of the promo would lead to any perception that what was shown should be taken seriously.

Accordingly, TV3 declined to find any breach of standard G2 particularly, it argued, when the promo had screened well past the AO watershed within an AO programme.

Noting that South Park was a cartoon aimed at adults, and which relied on satirising social mores and habits for comedic effect, TV3 contended that it was not intended to be viewed as reality. The promo, the broadcaster wrote, did not incite the murder of children. Both the promo and the episode were comedic and cartooned, which lent the footage a definitive non-realistic feel, it continued. None of that footage, TV3 alleged, suggested that it was appropriate to hurt or kill children in real life. Thus the broadcaster declined to find any breach of standard G5.

In considering standard G13, TV3 noted that it:

…originated to protect different groups of people from being exposed to harm or ridicule from society because programmes being broadcast exposed those groups as inferior.

Here, the broadcaster wrote, the boy in the promo was a cartoon character in a crazy town (which did not exist) in the United States. As a fictitious cartoon boy in a comedy programme, the boy could not be discriminated against, TV3 contended. Even if the character did represent all human boys and his fate, portrayed in the promo, did lead to discrimination against boys in real life, it continued, the character was a sympathetic one whom an audience would like, rather than discriminate against.

Additionally, the broadcaster stressed, as a comedic or humorous programme, South Park was exempt from the provisions of standard G13, for standard G13(iii) excluded material which was "humorous, satirical or dramatic work".

TV3 next dealt with the complaint concerning the episode of South Park. It considered this under standard G2. It emphasised that the programme was rated AO, and that the particular episode had commenced at 9.30 pm, an hour after the AO watershed.

The particular episode, TV3 wrote:

…successfully satirises the parents who leave their children to be baby-sat by the television and who complain about the fart jokes on television, yet indulge in such jokes amongst themselves (as they all have diarrhoea).

In declining to find a breach of standard G2, the broadcaster contended that, in the context of an AO, obviously satirical programme which screened after 9.30 pm:

…the fart and diarrhoea jokes were not only acceptable but crucial to the humour of the programme. The jokes …are mirrored and magnified by the very people who found [the characters] disgusting and inappropriate, thus effectively satirising the parents’ double standards. This theme has some merit in the context of our own society.

Ms O’Brien’s Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 26 May 1998

Dissatisfied with TV3’s response, Ms O’Brien referred her complaints to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

She replied to TV3 that it was no defence that the offending promo was shown in an AO time-slot. The complainant wrote that adults:

…commit most of the violence against children. To seed any mind with the idea of an authoritative request/order to kill a child & burn its body is not a humorous subject.

Ms O’Brien continued that perhaps irresponsible people or people with very sick minds could regard the horrific content of the "news update" (in the promo) as a joke. Such people, she contended, were more likely to be actively influenced by such television programmes.

TV3’s Response to the Authority – 12 June 1998

TV3 advised that it had no further comments on the complaints.