BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

A repeat broadcast of the programme Who Dares Wins was broadcast on TV2 on 10 December 1998 at 7.30pm. A Melbourne man responded to a dare to appear on stage with the male revue troupe Manpower.

Ms Dawn Shelford of Rotorua complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, on behalf of the group Preserving Communication Standards. In her view the broadcast was offensive, particularly during family viewing time.

In its response, TVNZ noted that the programme complained about had been the subject of an earlier complaint to the Authority which had not been upheld. It advised that the arguments it advanced then remained valid.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ’s decision, Ms Shelford 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 a tape of the item broadcast and have read the correspondence which is listed in the Appendix. On this occasion, the Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

A repeat episode of the programme Who Dares Wins was broadcast on TV2 on 10 December 1998 at 7.30pm. A Melbourne man was dared to appear on stage with Manpower, a male revue troupe.

Ms Shelford, on behalf of the group Preserving Communication Standards, complained to TVNZ that the broadcast was offensive because of the excessive focus on a pornographic entertainment theme. She did not consider the material was suitable for a free to air television broadcast in during family viewing time. She also complained that the programme had been classified as G.

In its response, TVNZ advised that it had considered the complaint under standards G2 and G8 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. Those 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.

G8  To abide by the classification codes and their appropriate time bands as outlined in the agreed criteria for classification.

TVNZ noted that the complaint concerned a programme which had been the subject of a previous complaint to the Authority (Decision No: 1997-068), and that the complaint had not been upheld by the Authority.

TVNZ said it saw little point in revisiting the complaint. However, it noted, one point needed to be cleared up, and that was the rating of the programme. It noted that while most of the episodes of Who Dares Wins were rated G, this particular episode had a PGR rating. It noted that the programme was screened at 7.30pm, which was PGR time. It declined to uphold the complaint.

In her referral to the Authority Ms Shelford complained that TVNZ had effectively disregarded the fact that the programme had previously been the subject of a formal complaint. She suggested its decision to broadcast the programme made a mockery of the advice contained in the Authority’s leaflet that lodging a formal complaint was an effective way for viewers and listeners to influence programme standards. She contended that as the complaint had not been upheld, the leaflet was hypocritical.

As for the classification, Ms Shelford noted that the Listener and other publications listed the programme as being classified G. However, she wrote, it should not have been broadcast in that time band. Why, she asked, if it was harmless for family viewing, was the show in question restricted to adults only when it was performed on stage?

In its response to the Authority, TVNZ pointed out that Ms Shelford had overlooked the fact that after proper investigation the earlier complaint was not upheld by TVNZ. A subsequent review of that decision by the Authority similarly found no breach of standards. It made the observation that if a complaint was not upheld, there was no cause to make any alterations or adjustments to any repeat broadcast which was scheduled.

TVNZ submitted that, because it believed Ms Shelford was probably aware of the earlier decision, in accordance with s.11(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989, the Authority should consider declining to determine the complaint on the grounds that it was vexatious.

In her final comment to the Authority, Ms Shelford responded to TVNZ’s suggestion that the Authority should deal with the complaint under s.11(a). Claiming she was speaking on behalf of her group, she asserted that if a formal complaint was lodged about a programme, the complainant was then led to believe that their effort and views would have some effective influence on the broadcaster concerned. She believed that it was inappropriate for TVNZ to repeat a programme which had been the subject of a formal complaint.

The Authority confirms that it has received a complaint about this programme from another member of the same group in Rotorua residing at the same address. That complaint was not upheld. The Authority finds no reason to revise its decision.

The Authority accepts that the programme may not be to Ms Shelford’s taste, however it did not cross the threshold to breach any broadcasting standards. It reminds Ms Shelford that in order for a complaint to influence programme standards there must first be a breach of standards.

Accordingly the Authority 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
19 March 1999

Appendix

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

Dawn Shelford’s Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd – 8 January 1999

TVNZ’s Response to the Formal Complaint – 21 January 1999

Ms Shelford’s Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 8 February 1999

TVNZ’s Response to the Authority – 11 February 1999

Ms Shelford’s Final Comment – 21 February 1999