BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

Two programmes entitled "Secrets Revealed" and "More Secrets Revealed" broadcast

on TV3 on 26 December 1995 and 2 January 1996 at 7.30pm included segments which

showed how magicians perform the illusion of suspension, and of sawing a woman in

half.

Mr Bennett, a professional magician, complained to TV3 Network Services Ltd that

publicly airing the secrets behind the illusions had forced him to drop the routines from

his stage show. He considered that revealing the secrets breached the standards of good

taste and decency, and breached his privacy because it contravened his rights as an

entertainer.

TV3 responded that the programmes did not contain anything which was offensive or

indecent and noted that they had been screened all around the world. With respect to the

privacy breach, TV3 pointed out that while it understood Mr Bennett had purchased the

right to perform the tricks, it had purchased the programme and had the right to screen it

so long as it did not breach broadcasting codes. Dissatisfied with that decision, Mr

Bennett referred his complaints 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 complaints.

Decision

The members of the Authority have viewed the items complained about and have read

the correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). As is its practice, the Authority

determines the complaints without a formal hearing.

A compilation of items in two different programmes, the first entitled "Secrets

Revealed", the second "More Secrets Revealed" broadcast by TV3 on 26 December

1995 and 2 January 1996 at 7.30pm respectively, revealed the secrets behind two magic

illusions. The first explained the secret behind suspension, and included a

demonstration of how the feat was performed and the special equipment required. The

second demonstrated the illusion of sawing a woman in half and likewise betrayed the

secret by revealing the special equipment required to accomplish the illusion.

Mr Bennett, a professional magician, angrily complained that as a result of the broadcast

of the two programmes he had been forced to omit the two effects from his stage show,

having paid for the rights and equipment to perform them. He advised that he was

writing on behalf of other magicians performing in New Zealand who were similarly

affected in their professional capacity. He alleged the broadcast breached the standard

of good taste and decency, and invaded his privacy.

Acknowledging that the damage had already been done by the revelation of these two

secrets, he sought from TV3 an assurance that it would not televise such programmes in

the future.

TV3 advised that it had considered the complaint under 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.

TV3 denied that the programme contained any material which could be found offensive

or indecent. It argued that the revealing of the secrets behind a magic trick was not an

indecent act and pointed out that the programme had been broadcast all around the

world.

With respect to Mr Bennett's claim that his privacy had been breached, TV3 maintained

that while he had purchased the right to perform the illusions it (TV3) had purchased the

programmes and had the right to screen them as long as there was no breach of

broadcasting practice.

When he referred the complaint to the Authority, Mr Bennett argued that the broadcast

had an impact on his ability to earn an income as a magician and illusionist. He stressed

that magicians undertook an oath of secrecy vowing not to reveal the secrets behind

their illusions. While he accepted that TV3 had the right to purchase a programme, he

expressed his concern that no thought was given to how the livelihood of a magician

was affected. Noting that the segment that revealed the magic illusions occurred at the

beginning of each of the two programmes, he suggested that it would have been easy

for those segments to have been excised.

The Authority recognises the commercial implications of the broadcast on Mr Bennett

and other magicians. However, it believes that he cannot rely on the Authority – under

the auspices of the Broadcasting Act 1989 – to protect his proprietary rights. The

Authority notes that the programme itself acknowledged that magicians were bound not

to reveal the secrets behind magic tricks but that nevertheless a magician, whose identity

was disguised, was prepared to risk his professional reputation and expose those

secrets.

It decides that the programmes did not breach broadcasting standards and observes that

Mr Bennett must rely on his professional organisation and, possibly, the law to protect

his rights to perform and the trade secrets behind the illusions.

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

complaints.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Judith Potter
Chairperson
27 June 1996

Appendix

Mr Bennett's Complaint to TV3 Network Services Ltd - 5 January 1996

Mr Bennett of Auckland complained to TV3 about its broadcast of the programmes

"Secrets Revealed" and "More Secrets Revealed" on 26 December 1995 and 2 January

1996 at 7.30pm respectively. Magical tricks and illusions were among the subjects

explained.

Mr Bennett, a professional magician, expressed his anger that two of his own illusions

(sawing in half and suspension) were exposed for all to see. He stated that he had had

to drop the two effects from his stage show and, noting that he had paid the cost of

importing the equipment and the right to work the two illusions he regarded that as

unfair and that because of the programme, his livelihood was affected.

He said that he had contacted other magicians both in New Zealand and overseas and all

were dismayed at the content. Mr Bennett referred to correspondence to the Minister of

Broadcasting from the Secretary of the International Brotherhood of Magicians

regarding the programmes when they were first broadcast in 1995, and described TV3's

attitude as obnoxious and arrogant.

In a second letter dated 15 January, Mr Bennett advised TV3 that he considered the

programmes breached standards of good taste and decency because revealing how a

magic trick was done was not in good taste, particularly toward the magician. He also

considered the programmes breached his privacy because his rights as an international

entertainer were contravened by revealing the secrets of magic.

Mr Bennett concluded that the damage had been done and no amount of compensation

could restore the secrets. He wrote:

I believe in good faith Television 3 should respect all Magician's rights as

entertainers, their interests and I wish to request that further televising of

programmes of this nature eg Secrets Revealed, should not be televised in

future.

TV3's Response to the Formal Complaint - 11 April 1996

TV3 responded that "Secrets Revealed" and "More Secrets Revealed" did not contain

any content which could possibly be found to be offensive or indecent. It noted that the

programmes explained how a number of secrets worked, ranging from the secrets of

American $20 bills to the ending of Terminator 2. It also contained the secret of sawing

a woman in half and suspension.

TV3 acknowledged that while people enjoyed magic tricks, they also enjoyed seeing

and understanding how the tricks worked. It argued that the revealing of a magic trick

was not an indecent act and noted that the programme had been seen all around the

world, especially in America.

With regard to the complaint about a breach of privacy, TV3 stated that while it

understood Mr Bennett had purchased the rights to perform the trick of sawing a

woman in half, it (TV3) had purchased the programmes and therefore had the right to

screen them, provided that they did not breach the standards.

Mr Bennett's Referral to the Authority - 24 April 1996

Dissatisfied with TV3's decision not to uphold his complaint, Mr Bennett referred it to

the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

He noted that in his previous letter he had explained how the broadcast of the

programmes affected his livelihood. He considered TV3's reply unacceptable. Noting

that TV3 confirmed that people enjoy magic, Mr Bennett pointed out that magicians

undertook an oath of secrecy and did not reveal the secrets of their illusions. If they did

so, they would not be able to make a living at their art.

To TV3's comment that it could broadcast the programmes because it had purchased the

rights to do so, Mr Bennett noted that it did so without considering how it would affect

the livelihood of an individual. As a magician and illusionist, he stated that he could not

continue to purchase magic props if he knew that television programmes were going to

expose the secrets. In his view, his request to TV3 was not unreasonable, and he

suggested that as the segments revealing the magic tricks was at the beginning of the

programmes, it would have been easy for those portions to have been cut.

Mr Bennett advised that as spokesman for a number of Magic Circles within New

Zealand he would be happy to attend a hearing if requested to represent the Magicians of

New Zealand. The issue, he concluded, affected all of them.

TV3's Response to the Authority - 6 May 1996

TV3 advised that it had no further comment to make.