BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary

During the programme In the Pink broadcast on the University of Auckland's 95bFM

on 18 February 1996 about 9.00pm, the presenter used the word "fuck" on more than

one occasion.

The Credo Society, through its Secretary Mrs Faithfull, complained to the station that

the use of that language was offensive and breached broadcasting standards. The

Society pointed to previous correspondence it had had with the station about the same

language and expressed its concern about the station's procedures for dealing with

formal complaints.

In its response, 95bFM argued that in the context of a student radio station

broadcasting programmes for adults in the later evening, the use of the word "fuck"

was not a breach of standards. Nevertheless, it advised, its presenter had been

reprimanded for his outburst in which he used the word several times. It declined to

uphold the complaint.

Dissatisfied with that decision, the Credo Society 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 determine the complaint.

Decision

The members of the Authority have read the correspondence (summarised in the

Appendix). No tape was available. As is its practice, the Authority assesses the

complaint without a formal hearing.

A programme entitled In the Pink was broadcast on the University of Auckland's

student radio station 95bFM on 18 February 1996 about 9.00pm. During that

programme the announcer used the word "fuck" on more than one occasion and played

a song which contained similar language.

The Credo Society, through its secretary Mrs Faithfull, complained to the station that

it had failed in its obligation to maintain standards consistent with good taste and

decency. In its referral to the Authority, the Society also complained that in previous

correspondence with the station about a similar matter, it had not received a

satisfactory reply. The Society considered the station lacked an appropriate system

for dealing with complaints and accused the station manager of confused and arbitrary

decision-making on what constituted offensive language.

In its response, 95bFM first apologised for being unable to supply the Authority with

a tape of the programme complained about. The Station Manager explained that the

incident occurred under previous management and gave an assurance that systems

were being put in place to ensure the station's statutory obligations were complied

with in the future.

It then examined the complaint under standard R2 of the Radio Code of Broadcasting

Practice, which requires broadcasters:

            R2        To take into consideration currently accepted norms of decency          

                        and good taste in language and behaviour, bearing in mind the context

                        in which any language or behaviour occurs.

95bFM maintained that in the context of the programme the use of the word "fuck"

did not violate broadcasting standards. It argued that the word was becoming more

acceptable throughout society, particularly among those in the 18-24 year old age

group, the target audience of the station. While it accepted that to some sectors of

society it still caused offence, it emphasised that the station accurately reflected the

youth culture in which it was immersed. Furthermore, it acknowledged that as a free-

to-air broadcaster it still had to be mindful of the diversity of views regarding language

and minimise the possibility of causing offence. To that end, it maintained, it abided

by a policy of keeping the use of language such as "fuck" to a minimum, and scheduled

programmes such as In the Pink in late time periods so that they were unlikely to

attract listeners other than the target audience.

The station apologised for the outburst by the announcer, advising that not only was

it bad radio, but that he contravened station policy and had been reprimanded for it

subsequently. It repeated that it did not consider it had breached standard R2, bearing

in mind the youth culture and the late time slot, and declined to uphold the complaint.

The Authority finds it regrettable that no tape of the item is available. Its task

becomes impossible when it has no ability to measure the gravity of the outburst and

to assess whether the standard was contravened. When a breach of good taste is

alleged, it is required to take into account contextual matters which, without a tape, it

is almost invariably unable to do. It considers it unfortunate that its ability to perform

its statutory functions is diminished by a systems failure on the part of the station.

The Authority is reluctantly forced to conclude that it is unable to determine the

complaint that standard R2 was breached because there is no tape of the item.

By way of a general comment in response to the station's arguments that the use of

the word "fuck" was acceptable to its special audience, the Authority reports that it

does not accept a claim that, because a programme is targeted for a specific audience,

the broadcaster is absolved from observing broadcasting standards. While it is unable

to comment on the specifics of this incident, it observes that it takes into account

contextual matters when it considers a potential breach of the good taste standard and

advises strongly against the gratuitous use of the word "fuck" by any broadcaster.

For the reasons set forth above, the Authority declines to determine the

complaint in all the circumstances under s. 11(b) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Judith Potter
Chairperson
1 August 1996

Appendix

Credo Society Inc's Complaint to 95bFM(Auckland) – 7 March 1995

Mrs Barbara Faithfull, on behalf of Credo Society Inc. complained to 95bFM about

the language of its programme In the Pink broadcast on 18 February 1996 about

8.50pm.

The Society alleged the broadcast failed to maintain standards consistent with good

taste and decency because it allowed the use of the F word. During the programme,

the word was used a number of times, including in a station promo. Then, just after

8.50pm, when discussing the 5th anniversary of the programme the presenter used the

word on a number of occasions. Finally, at the end of the programme, he played what

the Society described as:

....a crude and aggressively sung recording, riddled with the same language.

Prior to playing the song, the presenter warned listeners of its content and advised

those who found crude language offensive to turn off their radios. He warned against

anyone lodging a complaint about it.

Mrs Faithfull appended some correspondence which detailed the Society's previous

dealings with the station on a similar matter in 1995. She noted that she had not

received a reply from the station after her letter of 4 April 1995.

95bFM's Response to the Complaint – 14 March 1996

In a brief letter, the station referred the Society to its correspondence of 15 March

1995, in particular to its arguments that the programme was one aimed at homosexuals

and that the show was attempting to desensitise certain words.

95bFM's 1995 letter suggested that "fuck" was a word the usage of which was being

desensitised. Its station manager suggested that while she did not consider "fuck" to

be any worse than damn, she accepted that some people did and therefore she would

not countenance its continual usage on air. She also suggested that the use of the word

on a gay show did not breach standards of good taste and decency because its common

parlance for sexual intercourse for that audience. She continued:

It does not create more crime if we say "fuck", it builds our awareness to the

concept, and to its insignificance, helps us to understand what it means, not to

fear, loathe or despise or those who do it and will, I suggest, in a few years

time, not be an insult to anybody.

Finally, in its 1995 letter, the station concluded that standards of decency were

constantly changing. However, it acknowledged that its presenter had been instructed

to be more prudent in his use of the word "fuck" and that the word should not be used

gratuitously.

Credo Society's Referral to the Authority – 15 April 1996

Dissatisfied with 95bFM's decision not to uphold the complaint, the Society referred

it to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act

1989.

The Society requested that the Authority review what it considered to be the

inappropriate and inadequate action on the part of the Station in dealing with the

formal complaint.

Mrs Faithfull, for the Society, then traversed the correspondence of the previous year,

commenting on some of the station's responses.

The Society expressed concern about what it described as the use of vulgar language

and the station's failure to maintain standards of good taste and decency. It was

critical of the station's apparent lack of an adequate system for responding to

complaints and suggested that its former Station Manager was unsuited for the task of

dealing with complaints about language because her own views were so extreme.

95bFM's Response to the Authority – 14 May 1996

The Station first apologised for being unable to supply a tape of the programme,

noting that its Board of Directors was advised of the lapse.

It maintained that the word "fuck" was becoming more acceptable in society, in

particular with the 18-24 year old age group, who used the word in many different

ways. The station conceded that the word might have negative connotations for some

groups in society but asserted that, on this occasion and in the context of a youth

radio station whose listeners did not find the word offensive, there was no breach. It

suggested that the station accurately reflected the youth culture.

Noting its statutory responsibility to avoid causing offence, the station accepted that

it had a duty to minimise the use of the word "fuck" and had taken care to schedule

such programmes as In the Pink in later time periods.

It added that the presenter's outburst during the programme had drawn a reprimand,

not only because it was bad radio, but because he flouted station policy.

The station concluded that no standards had been breached, bearing in mind the

context (the youth culture and the late time slot) in which the language occurred.

Credo Society's Final Comment to the Authority – 13 June 1996

The Society pointed out what it regarded as contradictions in 95bFM's reasoning and

noted that there had still been no explanation as to the change in station policy to

allow the "F word" on air.

The Society stated that even though 95bFM had contended that there was no breach

of broadcasting standards, the DJ involved had been reprimanded. This approach it

considered was clearly inconsistent.