BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary

An episode of It Ain’t Half Hot Mum, based around a fictional troupe of British soldiers in Burma in World War II entertaining fellow soldiers on stage, included a number of "Indian" characters. The episode was broadcast on Prime TV on 2 May 1999 at 8.05 pm.

Mr Theodore complained to Prime Television New Zealand Limited, the broadcaster, that the episode portrayed Indian people as inherently inferior, that a white actor wearing brown make-up to impersonate an "Indian look and accent" breached norms of decency and good taste, and that the broadcaster had failed to inform viewers of the accuracy of factual matters raised in the episode.

Prime TV responded that the programme was not factual, and that within the context of its farcical approach it had not breached norms of taste or decency. It denied that the programme was discriminatory, and said that it was a legitimate satirical work.

Dissatisfied with Prime TV’s response, Mr Theodore 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.

The Complaint

It Ain’t Half Hot Mum was a comedy series based around a troupe of British soldiers in Burma in World War II, charged with entertaining their fellow soldiers on stage and led by two British officers and a sergeant-major. Included in the troupe were a number of "Indian" characters who had diverse roles in the entertainment. An episode broadcast on Prime TV at 8.05 pm on 2 May featured the "Indian" characters as soccer players and referee.

Mr Theodore complained to Prime TV that the broadcaster did not attempt to inform its viewers about "accurate points of fact" in British-occupied India in the era in which the programme was set. In addition, he wrote that norms of decency and taste were breached by the programme’s use of a white actor wearing brown make-up to impersonate an "Indian look and supposed accent". Finally, he complained that the programme portrayed Indians as inherently inferior, and glorified their "slavery" by demeaning their occupational status as "British Lackeys and Coolies".

In response, Prime TV wrote that the series was comedy. It noted that the troupe in the series portrayed a ragbag ensemble typifying English society. The humour was both subtle and overt, it wrote. It required a good understanding of British cultural and social mores to recognise that the humour lay in the ridiculousness of the beliefs behind the words.

The broadcaster considered the complaint in the context of standards G1, G2 and G13 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. Those standards require broadcasters:

G1   To be truthful and accurate on points of fact.

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.

Emphasising that the programme was "complete farce", the broadcaster wrote that it made no claim to be factual and had no onus placed upon it to include factual representations. It declined to find a breach of standard G1.

Prime TV said that the key to standard G2 lay in the concluding words "bearing in mind … context". The programme was farce, it said, and farce provided both the context and the reason why there was not a breach of the standard. It declined to uphold the standard G2 complaint.

In considering standard G13, the broadcaster noted that the programme lampooned and satirised all the characters it portrayed. The programme did not set out to tell viewers that the Indian characters were inferior, but it did show what they had to put up with, it wrote, adding:

…the distinction is quite plain to see, and [we] do not believe the programme … can be held to condone or promote ill will, violence or discrimination against you or the Indian population of New Zealand.

In referring his complaint to the Authority, Mr Theodore reiterated that a European actor with his face "browned" was not in good taste. He argued that comedy based on the belief that one people are inferior to another was in breach of standard G13, pointing out that to have a people send themselves up was entirely different from treating another people as inferior.

Prime TV responded by reiterating that the contextual exceptions in the codes applied. Recently, there had been many locally produced programmes which similarly lampooned segments of New Zealand society, it wrote. The broadcaster concluded that if the episode was deemed anything other than innocuous, it would be "a revelation with serious implications for broadcasters".

Mr Theodore reiterated that his complaint was not about a particular people lampooning themselves. Recent comedy, he wrote, did not include actors portraying people in a way that represented those others as inherently inferior. "In It Ain’t Half Hot Mum it is not Indians laughing at themselves, it is the Europeans who deem that a white man aping an Indian is deemed funny", he argued. The Black and White Minstrel Show was taken off the air by responsible broadcasters because it aped and demeaned a lot of people, he wrote.

The Authority’s Findings

In considering the complaint, first, under standard G1, the Authority notes that the standard requires programmes presented by broadcasters to be truthful and accurate "on points of fact". In this instance, It Ain’t Half Hot Mum is a work of fiction, and does not purport to present its contents as factual. The standard is not applicable to the programme, and the Authority declines to uphold this aspect of the complaint.

Second, in turning to standard G2, the Authority notes Mr Theodore’s complaint that a white actor wearing brown make-up to impersonate an Indian look and accent was in breach of the standard, and that there was nothing funny in Europeans finding humour in a white man aping an Indian. The Authority looks to the context in which the language and behaviour occurred, as required by the standard. As the Authority sees them, the relevant contextual factors are that the series is a work of fiction, and its comedic, almost vaudeville nature is well-known. The programme’s humour may not have appeal to a wide audience, but that is not a matter for the Authority’s consideration under this standard. The standard G2 aspect of the complaint is also declined.

Third, in examining the complaint under standard G13, the Authority stresses that this standard does not apply to material which is broadcast "in the legitimate context of a humorous, satirical or dramatic work". For the reasons expressed in its consideration of standard G2, the Authority finds that the relevant contextual factors excuse any possible threat to the standard posed by the particular episode of which Mr Theodore complained.

In all the circumstances, the Authority is unable to find any breach of standards G1, G2 or G13.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
29 July 1999

Appendix

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

1. Sanjay Theodore’s Complaint to Prime Television New Zealand Limited – 6 May 1999

2. Prime TV’s Response to the Formal Complaint – 26 May 1999

3. Mr Theodore’s Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 2 June 1999

4. Prime TV’s Response to the Authority – 8 June 1999

5. Mr Theodore’s Final Comment – 11 June 1999