BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

An item which reported that the New Zealand Prostitutes Collective supported HIV

positive sex workers who continued to work while using condoms was included on

One Network News broadcast on TV1 between 6.00–7.00pm on 16 February 1995.

Mrs Mudford complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, that

prostitutes, AIDS and condoms were not appropriate topics for a television news

item broadcast at a time when young children might be watching.

Maintaining that the item was newsworthy and that it had been presented discreetly,

TVNZ denied that the standards had been breached. Dissatisfied with TVNZ's

response, Mrs Mudford referred her complaint to the Broadcasting Standards

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

For the reasons below, the Authority declined 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

has determined the complaint without a formal hearing.

An item which reported the decision of the Prostitutes Collective to support HIV

positive sex workers who continued to work was reported on One Network News

between 6.00pm and 7.00pm. The item talked about the use of condoms and it was

also reported that the Collective received financial support from the Government.

Mrs Mudford complained to TVNZ that the item contained material which was not

appropriate to deal with at that hour – when children could be watching – and, as a

result, had breached the standards requiring good taste and decency.

TVNZ assessed 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.

Dealing first with the issue of whether the item was "news", TVNZ said that because

of the possible spread of HIV, the tax-payer funded Collective had been accused of

irresponsibility. Accordingly, it was a valid news item and it then asked whether it

was appropriately broadcast between 6.00–7.00pm.

TVNZ began by arguing that distaste for the topics of prostitution and the

transmission of sexually transmitted diseases was not a sufficient reason for not

broadcasting the item. Comparisons were drawn with other distasteful matters such

as war and child abuse and, it was argued, a news service had a responsibility to report

newsworthy events although they might also be horrifying.

Examining next the manner in which the news was broadcast, TVNZ said that it had

been discreet because of the hour of the broadcast and the item had not gone beyond

the bounds of an acceptable story at that time.

When she referred her complaint to the Authority, Mrs Mudford argued that it was

inappropriate for the news at that time to deal with such matters. In that letter and

subsequent ones, she also questioned whether anyone who worked in television

showed any interest in moral standards. She mentioned not only the item complained

about but contended that questions of sex seemed to be an essential aspect of many

programmes. In view of the extent to which sexuality permeated programmes, she

said that she and her friends believed that they were "wasting their time" in

complaining.

The Authority approached the complaint by asking, as had TVNZ, whether the story

was a valid news item or, as Mrs Mudford had argued, it was an example of TVNZ's

prurience. As the item had considered the possible spread of HIV, the Authority

decided that the item had dealt with an issue which was important to society and one

which should be addressed.

As to whether it had been dealt with appropriately in a broadcast between 6.00–

7.00pm, the Authority noted that 6.00–7.00pm was the main news hours for both

TVNZ and TV3 and, in addition, that television news at that time was an important

source of information for many New Zealanders and, accordingly, it accepted that it

was the time at which such matters could be dealt with.

Although the reference to context in standard G2 can be used as an argument by

broadcasters that the standard of good taste in language and behaviour in news items

need not comply precisely with the standards expected in other programmes at that

hour, the Authority does not accept that the standards pertaining to taste can be

disregarded during news. News items which deal with explicit moral issues must

display sensitivity. The Authority decided that the broadcast complained about had

complied with this requirement and, consequently, the complaint was not upheld.

For the reasons given above, the Authority declines to uphold the complaint.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Iain Gallaway
Chairperson
18 May 1995

Appendix

Mrs Mudford's Complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd - 16 February 1995

Mrs Mudford complained to Television New Zealand Ltd about an item broadcast

earlier that evening on One Network News between 6.00 - 7.00pm.

The item, she noted, had dealt with prostitutes, AIDS and condoms and she said that

such material was unnecessary at a time when young children might be watching. She

maintained that the broadcast breached the standard requiring good taste and decency.

TVNZ's Response to the Formal Complaint - 8 March 1995

TVNZ advised Mrs Mudford that its Complaints Committee had assessed the

complaint under standard G2 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. Its

reply began:

You will recall that the item reported that the New Zealand Prostitutes

Collective (which receives taxpayers' money) had angered some community

groups by deciding to support those HIV positive prostitutes who wanted to

continue their employment. The critics described the Collective's decision as

irresponsible.

Explaining that the item raised the question "what is news", TVNZ said that the story

dealt with the issue of alleged irresponsibility by a tax-payer funded organisation and

the possible spread of HIV. In TVNZ's view, the story was clearly news.

In considering whether the matter had been treated appropriately for an item

broadcast between 6.00 - 7.00pm, TVNZ maintained the material was suitably

discreet and had not gone beyond the accepted norms for a news story at that hour.

TVNZ continued:

The committee understands your distaste for stories involving sexually

transmitted diseases, but viewer distaste for a subject is no reason why a news

service should shy away from tackling it. Most people find war, child abuse,

famine and torture repugnant - but would expect news services to keep them

informed of such events, however horrifying. The alternative is that the evil in

the world goes unreported, with the public in a state of ignorance, not acting to

prevent injustices because it doesn't know about them.

Expressing regret that Mrs Mudford had been offended, TVNZ declined to uphold the

complaint.

Mrs Mudford's Complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority - 13 March

1995

Dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, Mrs Mudford referred her complaint to the

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

Explaining that her concerns were shared by her friends, Mrs Mudford questioned

whether there were any standards at all. The item, she added, was "quite

unnecessary". Questioning also whether there was any point in complaining, she

wrote:

Obviously there is nobody in control who cares about moral standards and if we

don't like what we see that is just too bad. I am not satisfied with the decision

at all.

In a second letter dated 19 March, she expressed her disappointment that television

programmes, rather than being educational, informative and entertaining, were

damaging and portrayed a society full of crime and violence.

Referring specifically to the item complained about, Mrs Mudford said it did not take

into account the point that young children did not need to know about such matters as

prostitutes and condoms. It was no surprise that young people were sexually active,

she wrote, as the media was obsessed with sexual matters.

TVNZ's Response to the Authority - 28 March 1995

In its report to the Authority, TVNZ again expressed regret that Mrs Mudford was

offended but argued that the newsworthy story was dealt with in an appropriate

fashion for the early evening news.

Mrs Mudford's Final Comment - 11 April 1995

Expressing the opinion that the television authorities regarded sex as an essential part

of the news, Mrs Mudford believed that television had no intention of changing its

practices and that her complaint was a waste of time. Such material, she maintained,

was doing untold damage to society. Stating, "People who are in control of most

things nowadays care only about the money they are making", she quoted former

Governor General Sir Paul Reeves who said that radio was now regarded so highly

because television news was so bad.