BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary

An item on Breakfast broadcast on TV One at about 7.40 am on 9 July 1998 reviewed the contents of leading women’s magazines published during that week. A studio guest referred to Paula Yates, who was featured in a magazine, and commented that Yates was known largely "for shagging the famous".

Mr Yoxall complained to Television New Zealand Limited, the broadcaster, that the remark was vulgar, and an unacceptable breach of good taste and decency.

TVNZ responded that the context of the remark was that the live studio broadcast was as tabloid as the magazines it reviewed. The comment was the guest’s genuinely-held opinion, and reflected a widely-held view of Yates. It was delivered in a light-hearted, laconic manner and, although unfortunate in view of Yates’ apparent attempted suicide, did not breach the standard, TVNZ wrote.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ’s response, Mr Yoxall 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 summarised in the Appendix). On this occasion, the Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

The Breakfast programme on TV One on 9 July 1998 broadcast, at about 7.40 am, a review of leading women’s magazines published during that week. A guest reviewer commented that Paula Yates, who was featured in one of the magazines, was best known for "shagging the famous".

Mr Yoxall complained that the comment was vulgar, and an unacceptable breach of good taste and decency.

TVNZ responded that it was important to place the comment in context. The remark, it wrote, was made during a regular live studio spot which was as tabloid as the magazines it reviewed. The guest commentator was expressing her genuinely-held opinion, the broadcaster continued, and it was not out of line with a widely perceived view of Paula Yates. Throughout her career, Ms Yates had been seen to cultivate an image which had attracted tabloid press attention, TVNZ wrote.

The broadcaster considered the complaint in the context of standard G2 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice, which 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.

Noting that the comment was delivered in a light-hearted fashion, and articulated a widely-held view of Ms Yates, TVNZ declined to uphold the complaint. It acknowledged the unfortunate proximity of the comment to an apparent suicide attempt by Ms Yates, and wrote that the matter had been taken up with the programme by its managing editor of news and current affairs. The broadcaster concluded that it would have preferred the commentator to be more circumspect.

In referring his complaint to the Authority, Mr Yoxall questioned why TVNZ would have preferred the guest to have been more circumspect, if it considered the remarks to be acceptable. He concluded that if the broadcaster saw the Breakfast programme as tabloid and, as such, able to practise standards such as were broadcast, perhaps it should have carried a warning about its content and the need for parental guidance.

Dealing with the issue of decency and good taste, the Authority looks first to the comments which were made. It notes that "shagging" is a colloquial expression and is defined by the Concise Oxford Dictionary as meaning "having sexual intercourse with". The Authority accepts that the complainant’s term "vulgar" is an accurate description of the studio guest’s comments. However vulgar expression does not necessarily constitute a breach of the standard and the Authority now turns, as the standard requires, to look to the context in which the remarks were made.

The Authority considers that the context for the comments was a programme specifically targeted at adult viewers and with low appeal to children. The comments, it notes, were the genuinely-held opinion of a guest media commentator who could well have been expressing the views of many viewers who had followed the fortunes of Ms Yates, a veteran of tabloid publications who has led a very colourful life. The Authority appreciates that the comments made about Ms Yates were contentious but it accepts that their method of delivery was inoffensive. In concluding that the comments did not breach the standard, the Authority takes cognizance of TVNZ’s remarks to the complainant that, in retrospect, it would have wished the commentator to be more circumspect. On balance, however, the Authority finds that the comments were not sufficiently offensive as to endanger the standard.

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

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
24 September 1998

Appendix

G A Yoxall’s Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd – 6 July 1998

Mr Yoxall of Wellington complained to Television New Zealand Limited about a comment made on the programme, Breakfast, broadcast on TV One at about 7.40 am on 6 July 1998.

He wrote that, during a review of women’s magazines, a female reviewer had commented on Paula Yates and said that Yates was famous more for "shagging the famous" rather than having any other claim to fame.

The comment was vulgar, Mr Yoxall considered, and an unacceptable breach of good taste and decency.

TVNZ’s Response to the Formal Complaint – 27 July 1998

TVNZ considered the complaint in the context of standard G2 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice.

It noted that it was important to place the comment in context. The remark, it wrote:

…was made during a regular live studio spot which, by its nature, is as "tabloid" as the magazines it sets out to review.

Noting that guest commentators in the item regularly expressed their genuinely-held views and opinions, TVNZ contended that, in this case, the commentator’s opinion was not out of line with a widely perceived view of Ms Yates. Throughout her career, it continued:

…she has been seen to deliberately cultivate a "wild girl" Bohemian image which has attracted the attention of the world’s tabloid press.

Stressing that the comment was delivered in a laconic, light-hearted manner, TVNZ wrote that the comment had not strayed beyond the boundaries of standard G2. It acknowledged that the proximity of the comment to an apparent suicide attempt by Ms Yates was unfortunate. That matter had been taken up with the programme by the broadcaster’s managing editor of News and Current Affairs and it concluded:

While acknowledging that we would have preferred the guest to have been more circumspect, we do not feel that the comment was sufficiently offensive to endanger the standard, especially when the tabloid nature of the post-suicide attempt articles she was reviewing is taken into account.

The broadcaster declined to uphold the complaint.

Mr Yoxall’s Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 3 August 1998

Dissatisfied with TVNZ’s response, Mr Yoxall referred his complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

Questioning the broadcaster’s response to him, he wrote:

Are they saying that if a woman has posed nude or been a T V reporter that she has poor moral values ? Is the current norm of decency in New Zealand really as they suggest, that such a comment does not offend against society ?

He also questioned why, if TVNZ had considered the remark to be acceptable, it would have preferred the item’s guest to be more circumspect. If the broadcaster considered Breakfast to be tabloid and, as such, entitled to practise the standards which were broadcast, then, he contended, it should be graded as necessary to carry a public warning that its content might offend, and parental guidance should be advised.

TVNZ’s Comments to the Authority - 11 August 1998

The broadcaster referred to Mr Yoxall’s belief that it was being inconsistent in finding no breach of standards, while wishing that the reviewer had been more circumspect. It wrote:

Broadcasters frequently look back on live performances and note how things could have been done better, or how something came across not quite the way intended. Such incidents do not amount to breaches of standards.

Reminding Mr Yoxall and the Authority that the comment was made by a guest on a live studio programme, TVNZ concluded that, although the complaint was under the good taste and decency standard, it was conscious of standard G3 when assessing the complaint. That standard required broadcasters to acknowledge the right of individuals to express their own opinions.

Mr Yoxall’s Final Comment – 20 August 1998

The complainant wrote that he welcomed informed expression in all matters as "such is the prime responsibility of the media in all its forms".

In this instance, he wrote, his complaint was about the words chosen to express the view which was held, "at a time of day and in a programme which was being viewed …[and which] offered a poor example and guidance to our nation’s youth".