Group Against Liquor Advertising and Television New Zealand Ltd - 1997-012
Members
- J M Potter (Chair)
- A Martin
- L M Loates
- R McLeod
Dated
Complainant
- Group against Liquor Advertising (GALA)
Number
1997-012
Programme
WeddingsBroadcaster
Television New Zealand LtdChannel/Station
TV2Standards
Summary
A verbal and visual reference to a stag party, where 80 men paid $50 per head so that
they could drink and eat as much as they liked and watch an all-girl jelly-wrestling floor
show, was included in the programme Weddings broadcast on TV2 at 9:00pm on 17
December 1996. The series dealt with the activities of some couples leading up to their
weddings.
GALA's Complaints Secretary, Mr Cliff Turner, complained to Television New
Zealand Ltd that the references to the stag party both encouraged the immoderate
consumption of alcohol and did not minimise the incidental promotion of liquor.
Acknowledging that the incidental promotion of liquor had not been minimised, TVNZ
upheld that aspect of the complaint. It reported that the programme makers in Australia
would be reminded of the standards in New Zealand. It did not accept that the
programme encouraged the immoderate consumption of liquor.
Dissatisfied with the extent of TVNZ's action on the aspect of the upheld, on GALA's
behalf Mr Turner referred the 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 the item complained about and have read the
correspondence (summarised in the Appendix). As is its practice, the Authority
determines the complaint without a formal hearing.
The programme Weddings, made in Australia, looked at the activities of some couples
as they prepared for their respective marriages. It was reported that a "stag" (or in
Australia, a "buck") party was held for one of the grooms for which 80 men paid $50
per head so that they could drink and eat as much as they liked, and watch an all-girl
jelly-wrestling floor show. The pictures of the party included in the programme
showed large quantities of beer cans. It was broadcast on TV2 at 9.00pm on 17
December 1996.
GALA's Complaints Secretary, Cliff Turner, complained to TVNZ that the broadcast
breached standards A3 and A5 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. They
read:
A3 Broadcasters will ensure that the incidental promotion of liquor is
minimised.
A5 Broadcasters – including announcers, programme hosts and commentators –
will not make ad lib comments which refer directly or indirectly to the
use or consumption of liquor in any way prohibited by the Advertising
Standards Authority's Code for Advertising Liquor.
Because of the shots showing large numbers of beer cans bearing labels available in
New Zealand, TVNZ accepted that it had not minimised the incidental promotion of
liquor. It upheld the complaint that the broadcast breached standard A3. It declined to
uphold the alleged contravention of standard A5. On the aspect upheld, TVNZ
reported:
The programme is, of course, made in Australia and TVNZ has no say in the
manner in which it is produced. As a consequence of your complaint, TVNZ will
approach the programme makers and remind them of the statutory obligations of
broadcasters in this country. The matter has also been discussed among the
programme appraisers, and the direct consequence has been that another sequence
from the Weddings series has been trimmed to minimise the promotion of liquor.
Dissatisfied with the extent of the action taken, Mr Turner on GALA's behalf referred
the complaint to the Authority. He considered that TVNZ has not exercised appropriate
editorial control.
As the programme explored different approaches to a wedding in Australia, the
Authority considers that the reference to the "stag" party, and to the activities there,
were appropriate. It also agrees with TVNZ, however, that the focus on the large
quantities of beer cans did not comply with standard A3.
GALA argued that a penalty should be imposed as a means to remind TVNZ to take
more care. The Authority does not agree that this is necessary. This is the first
occasion that such a programme has been found to be in breach of the standards relating
to the promotion of liquor and, in these circumstances, the Authority considers that
TVNZ's actions in response – in particular reminding the programme makers in
Australia of the standards in this country – to be appropriate.
For the reasons above, the Authority declines to uphold the complaint.
Signed for and on behalf of the Authority
Judith Potter
Chairperson
13 February 1997
Appendix
GALA's Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd - 18 December 1996
Cliff Turner, Complaints Secretary for the Group Against Liquor Advertising,
complained to Television New Zealand Ltd about an aspect of the programme
Weddings broadcast on TV2 at 9.00pm on 17 December 1996.
Mr Turner wrote about the item's reference to a stag party where, it was reported, the
best man had arranged for 80 men to pay $50 per head so that they could drink and eat
as much as they could, and watch an all-girl jelly-wrestling floor show. Referring to
rule 1(j) of the ASA Code for Advertising Liquor, Mr Turner argued that the item
breached standard A5 of the BSA's Television Code.
Mr Turner maintained, in addition, that there was a breach of standard A3 of the
Television Code on the basis:
It was not necessary to show the large number of beer cans. The men had paid to
drink and eat but there were no shots of food being prepared. If the story could
be told without showing food it follows that the story could have been told
without showing cans of beer.
TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint - 24 December 1996
Assessing the complaint under programme standards A3 and A5, and referring to rule
(j) of the Advertising Code, TVNZ stated that the item was a factual report of the stag
night portrayed. As it did not encourage the immoderate consumption of alcohol,
TVNZ did not accept that standard A5 had been contravened.
However, as there were shots showing large numbers of beer cans bearing labels freely
available in New Zealand, TVNZ conceded that the item had not minimised the
incidental promotion of liquor.
Thanking Mr Turner for drawing the matter to its attention, TVNZ recorded:
The programme is, of course, made in Australia and TVNZ has no say in the
manner in which it is produced. As a consequence of your complaint, TVNZ will
approach the programme makers and remind them of the statutory obligations of
broadcasters in this country. The matter has also been discussed among the
programme appraisers, and the direct consequence has been that another sequence
from the Weddings series has been trimmed to minimise the promotion of liquor.
GALA's Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 31
December 1996
Dissatisfied with the extent of the action taken, Mr Turner on GALA's behalf referred
the complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the
Broadcasting Act 1989. The standard A5 aspect, he wrote, was not referred.
Mr Turner recorded the following reason for the referral:
Once again TVNZ has failed to exercise editorial control. This was not a news
broadcast and presumably staff responsible for adherence to the Programme
Standards would have had ample opportunity to appraise the programme.
He argued that the imposition of a penalty by the Authority might ensure more care on
TVNZ's part in the future.
TVNZ's Response to the Authority - 14 January 1997
After noting some confusion about the standards referred to in GALA's
correspondence, TVNZ contended:
Briefly, and in reference to Mr Turner's reason for dissatisfaction, we simply
note that in instances like this one, interpretation of the standard is not a clear cut
matter - you cannot just count the beer cans. The item clearly needed to
acknowledge that liquor was present, and in large quantities. At what point the
standard was breached is a subjective matter and on this occasion TVNZ's
Complaints Committee, with the benefit of hindsight, concluded on balance that
the sequence should have been modified before broadcast. There should be no
adverse reflection on the work of the appraisers who handle more than nine-and-
a-half thousand programmes a year - and make hundreds of excisions to comply
with programme standards.
GALA's Final Comment - 21 January 1997
On GALA's behalf, Mr Turner explained that the referral to the Authority was
concerned solely with the standard A3 aspect of the complaint.