BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

The programme WCW Nitro features professional wrestling bouts staged in front of a live audience. In the episode broadcast on TV2 at 10.30pm on 20 November 1998, the wife of one wrestler was held and verbally abused while her husband was administered a hiding in wrestling terms by several other wrestlers.

Mr Poata complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, that the item was disgusting and breached both the general standards and the standards relating to the portrayal of violence. He accepted that the sequence might have been staged, but maintained it was unacceptable as it was "choreographed gang rape".

TVNZ acknowledged that the wrestler’s wife had been demeaned and the performance breached currently accepted community norms of good taste and decency. It upheld the complaint under the standards dealing with these issues. However, on the basis that violence standards did not apply to the theatrical context of professional wrestling, it did not consider that the violence standards were relevant.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's decision that the violence standards were not relevant, Mr Poata referred the complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

For the reasons below, the Authority concludes that the violence standards are applicable, but were not breached by the broadcast complained about.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed the item complained about, and have read had the correspondence listed in the appendix. In this instance, the Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

The programme WCW Nitro features professional wrestling bouts staged in front of live audiences. In the episode broadcast on 20 November 1998, the wife of wrestler Diamond Dallas Page was verbally abused and forcibly restrained in the ring during part of the programme in which her husband was attacked in pro-wrestling terms by a group headed by Hulk Hogan.

Mr Poata complained to TVNZ about the sequence, and referred specifically to the words which Hulk Hogan directed at the woman when he said, "Get a real man", and "I'm a real man." While acknowledging that the sequence might have been staged, Mr Poata described it as a "choreographed gang rape". Mr Poata also accepted that the broadcast was screened relatively late in the evening and, although he "could accept most things", he said that he was "disgusted" at this "garbage". In a later letter to TVNZ, he complained that the broadcast breached the standards relating to the portrayal of violence.

TVNZ assessed the complaint under standards V1, V2, V3, V4, G2 and G13 of the Television Code of Broadcasting practice. The first four read:

V1  Broadcasters have a responsibility to ensure that any violence shown is justifiable, ie is essential in the context of the programme.

V2  When obviously designed for gratuitous use to achieve heightened impact, realistic violence – as distinct from farcical violence – must be avoided.

V3  Warnings should be given, at least at the beginning of a programme, when a programme contains material which is likely to be disturbing to the average viewer or which is unexpectedly violent for that programme genre.

V4  The combination of violence and sexuality in a way designed to titillate must not be shown.

The other two 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.

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.

Concluding that professional wrestling bouts were as much theatrical performances as sporting events, TVNZ advanced the view that the sequence complained about, despite the woman's tears, was such a performance. It continued:

However we are not convinced that just because the woman took part voluntarily the programme escapes responsibility for complying with the statutory standards.

TVNZ considered that the woman had been demeaned, and in support of this view, mentioned the phrases directed at her about "Penthouse", and to the effect that she was "trailer trash". It stated:

Such comments in our view represented the woman as inherently inferior on account of her gender and we therefore found the sequence to be in breach of G13. We felt the same standard was breached by the manner in which the woman was manhandled by the bulky wrestlers who restrained her.

As the humiliation of the woman, in TVNZ's opinion, also breached currently accepted norms of good taste and decency in New Zealand, it upheld the standard G2 aspect as well. Turning to the violence standards, TVNZ commented:

As far as the violence standards are concerned, it is our view that in the theatrical context of a professional wrestling series, the standards do not really apply. We therefore set them aside as being not relevant.

On the aspects of the complaint upheld, standards G2 and G13, TVNZ said it would ensure that the sequence was not broadcast again. It intended to talk to the appraiser who approved the sequence, upon his return from leave.

As TVNZ had not upheld his complaint under the portrayal of violence standards, Mr Poata referred it to the Broadcasting Standards Authority. He argued that TVNZ had opted out of its responsibilities in deciding that they were not relevant.

In its report to the Authority, TVNZ said that the issues raised by the broadcast were taste and decency, and dignity of the individual, which were addressed in standards G2 and G13. The violence standards, it argued, were inadequate in the context of professional wrestling.

By way of final comment, Mr Poata considered that TVNZ's emphasis on the "theatrical" aspect of professional wrestling clouded the issues. Describing the sequence as offensive, Mr Poata maintained that the behaviour displayed involved aspects of sexual violation which were designed to titillate. He noted specifically that the broadcaster had ignored his reference to "choreographed gang rape".

The Authority's Findings

The Authority begins by explaining the relatively narrow issue that it is required to decide in its determination of this complaint.

TVNZ was asked by Mr Poata to assess the complaint under the following standards in the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice, G1, G13, V1, V2, V3 and V4. It upheld the standard G2 and G13 aspects on the basis that the broadcast failed to meet the standards of good taste and decency, and that it portrayed women as inherently inferior.

TVNZ declined to uphold the violence standards – V1 to V4 – as, it did not believe that they were relevant in the theatrical context of professional wrestling.

It was this latter decision which Mr Poata referred to the Authority. Accordingly, the Authority is required to decide, first, whether the violence standards are relevant and, if they are relevant, whether they were contravened by the broadcast.

On the first question, the Authority unhesitatingly is of the opinion that the violence standards apply to the programme complained about. The point that the broadcast involved professional wrestling is an issue which is to be taken into account when assessing the complaint pursuant to each specific standard. It does not mean that they are irrelevant. Indeed, the violence standards apply to all programmes from boxing to programmes designed for pre-schoolers although, obviously, the type of broadcast is relevant to the decision in each specific case.

Because the broadcast complained about on this occasion, WCW Nitro, depicts professional wrestling, the programme inevitably will include violence. For this reason, the Authority considers that the violence shown to Diamond Dallas Page for example was relevant in context. The Authority thus does not accept that standard V1 was contravened.

The Authority reaches the same conclusion in regard to standards V2 and V3. It accepts that professional wrestling contains substantial elements of theatre which are included for heightened impact, although it notes that such material is usually farcical. Professional wrestling, it observes, rather than being unexpectedly violent for the programme genre, often contains substantial sections which display bravado rather than violent action.

While it considers that standards V1, V2, and V3 were not contravened, the Authority considers that the contents of the broadcast brought standard V4 into question. It involved violence and, as TVNZ has acknowledged, the woman was treated as inherently inferior on account of her gender. It also notes Mr Poata’s description of the broadcast as "choreographed gang rape". As a consequence of the broadcast of this material, the Authority is faced with the issue: did the programme breach standard V4 by glamorising sexuality in a way which was designed to titillate?

After a careful consideration of the broadcast complained about, the Authority concludes that a more apt description than "choreographed gang rape", is "choreographed thuggery". While this type of behaviour could well be inapplicable in most types of broadcast, the Authority acknowledges that it is the format used for professional wrestling which is broadcast on television and, apparently, expected by viewers.

Taking the context of the broadcast into account, the Authority agrees with TVNZ that the way the woman was treated in the broadcast breached standard G2. In addition, it agrees that it breached standard G13. While it accepts that this was a valid complaint under standard V4, the Authority concludes that the broadcast did not contravene any of the nominated violence standards given the genre of the programme and the time of the broadcast.

For the above reasons the Authority declines to uphold the complaint.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
25 February 1999

Appendix

In its determination of this complaint, the Authority has considered the following correspondence.

1. Mr Poata's Formal Complaint (addressed to the Broadcasting Standards Authority) –
   24 November 1998

2. Procedural correspondence between TVNZ and Mr Poata in late November and
   early December 1998

3. TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint – 9 December 1998

4. Mr Poata's Response to TVNZ – 14 December 1998

5. Mr Poata's Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 14 December 1998

6. TVNZ's Response to the Authority – 17 December 1998

7. Mr Poata's Final Comment – 23 December 1998