You know, if you want to spend a half hour reading some of the most entertaining stuff on the web, while simultaneously shaking your head at the state of humanity, you can't really go past the Recent Decisions section of the Broadcasting Standards Authority website.
Published in bursts of a paragraph or so, the Recent Decisions section details the latest judgments from the BSA, including the original complaint and what the BSA decided to do about the complaint, if anything; for some reason, it seems they actually decide to do very little about any of the complaints. And I'm quite happy with that, to be honest: most of the complaints are quibbles that I can't imagine a large portion of the population agreeing with. Here's a recent example:
"Promos for The Almighty Johnsons, Sons of Anarchy and Terra Nova were broadcast during Dr Phil at approximately 1.30pm. The promos briefly showed images of weapons, including a knife and guns. The Authority did not uphold the complaint that these promos breached standards relating to good taste and decency, children's interests and violence: the promos did not contain any AO material, they were appropriately classified PGR and screened during Dr Phil which was classified AO, and the broadcaster had exercised sufficient care and discretion in dealing with the issue of violence."
So, someone complained that there were advertisements for AO-rated material during a show rated AO because it might be harmful to children? It seems to me that the complainant shouldn't be letting their children watch AO-rated material during the day, right? Especially not Dr Phil. I'd rather spend an hour being tortured by the gang on Sons of Anarchy than watch a single episode featuring that idiot.
The sad thing is that complaint isn't even the worst. One complainant accuses Homeland of promoting Islamophobia (which is ridiculous when you consider that part of Homeland's charm was that it confronted pre-existing notions about the Islamic faith). Another expresses dismay that Hone Harawira used the word "bullsh*t" during a news hour. I'd be more inclined to complain if Hone didn't get fired up on the nightly news.
Another claims that a scene containing pixellated nudity and sexual innuendo on Two & A Half Men breached guidelines on good taste and decency. Umm, the basis of every joke on Two & A Half Men is sexual innuendo. Though, to be fair, the fact that the show keeps getting made is indecent itself. Maybe this complaint just didn't go far enough.
Anyway, a recent jaunt through the decisions section had me thinking: what would it take for me to complain about something on television? How bad would a show need to be before I would write to the BSA?
Even though I'm a big advocate for personal responsibility when it comes to television - that is, knowing what my daughter is watching and making sure it's okay for her to watch - I do think that I might complain if something G-rated clearly should have been rated for a much older audience. But, even then, it would have to be pretty bad.
As for adult programming, I truly think anything goes after 8.30pm. It doesn't make sense to me that anyone would complain that a programme being made for an older audience, and airing later in the evening, was unsuitable for kids, especially if it was rated AO as opposed to PGR. My own rule is that if it airs after 8.30pm, check it before letting my daughter watch it - and don't be surprised if there's a little swearing, violence or nudity. But hey, that's just me.
What would make you send a complaint to the BSA? Have you ever actually given serious though to filing a complaint? Or perhaps you have complained to the BSA in the past - what set you off?
Make sure you like On the Box on Facebook and add Chris on Twitter.
Or, feel free to email Chris with any questions or ideas.
This is a spoiler-free blog - please comment responsibly.
Vote for ON THE BOX in the Netguide Web Awards. Click the icon on the left to reach the voting page, and add this blog's URL in the Best Blog field, near the foot of the page: http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/blogs/on-the-box
Sponsored links
What always cracks me up is just how many of the complainants to the BSA will sit through the entire program (that they will later decree offended them) just to note which bits did exactly.
For me, it would probably be some incredibly misleading news report under the accuracy standard. I did consider complaining about a public lecture that Radio NZ aired around Waitangi Day (they air a couple each year), but I decided that despite it being mind-blowingly misleading, it wasn't really their fault, but that of the Academic who gave it, so that seemed unfair to them.
On a decency-type thing, I did write to the Censor after seeing The Princess and the Frog, not really to complain, but just asking how it got a G rating. They replied - it got a G rating in Australia, and studios can just copy them over, but we've had a lot of people ask about this, and will look into it more closely for the DVD. Which was rated PG.
maybe that person thought Dr Phil was good childrens TV? I think the complaint should have been ruled out immediately as it came from someone who watches Dr Phil and therefore is suspect from the start.
I don't think I'd actually complain about anything on TV ever. This is for a couple of reasons 1. personal responsibility - if you don't like it, don't watch it, and as you point out Chris parents should take responsibility for what their children are watching. 2. Broadcasters are generally responsible with when they air their content. e.g. the Walking Dead is not on TV at 4.30pm once kids get home from school, its on at 9.30pm once their asleep. I know Sky has South Park (among other shows on other channels) on Comedey Central in the afternoon, but you can set up the parental lock to prevent the kids from watching. That links back to point 1. 3. Its actually too much effort to complain about something to the BSA. seriously who has time to lodge one? Do these people just sit at home all day waiting for stuff to complain about? Even if something did cause me to be concerned, it would simply be a case of 'wont be watching that again' rather than wasting time to complain.
The TV3 promotion of THAT Target episode is about the closest I would have ever come to thinking about talking to the BSA. I've got a pretty liberal thick skin when it comes to TV, but using brief clips of a man obviously masturbating during early evening prime time when children are likely to be watching is line crossing for me, especially as the episode in question was more concerned with titillation than consumer protection. It was just gratuitous and cynical.
Never have complained, and I doubt I ever would. Its totally pointless complaining about any show that isn't made here, and I pay no attention at all to show promos. Unless I pick one up off Youtube, and then the context is completely different.
I've been watching some children's shows recently, and it surprises me how adult they are in some respects. They're also very carefully done. One had a particularly violent rugby match, but it was only narrated from the viewpoint of the spectators. Although you heard some crunching sound effects, you never saw anything. When there was on-screen violence in other parts of the show it was heavily stylised and you always saw the injured parties stand up with "I'm okay" lines.
I can imagine even that sort of thing might be too much for some parents, and I don't think any of the shows have every screened here. They are kiddie horror shows though, and I suspect we work to different standards here.
But look at cartoons..some of them are the most violent things ever created and yet no-one ever worries about them. Or do they? I still have very vague memories of the days long ago when there was a move to declare comics indecent because a "child's medium" started featuring adult plots and storylines.
When they started playing the (endless) Family Guy promos on comedy central the clip they choose referenced getting a ride from Kobe Bryant... and this was around the time of the rape trial. I enjoy family guy but there are tons of funny bits... why use a rape joke in a promo that plays pretty much endlessly?
Anyway, that was the only time I considered complaining.
I'd be more likely to complain about that utter lack of anything decent to watch, particularly on a Wednesday night. Even with Sky.
Well I have never even considered it until last week I was taken aback watching Gyspy Blood where they started hacking up an animals face (a deer they killed) with a machete for fun.. For their children. Thought it was a tad odd was all.
Eight things I know about Once Upon A Time
Three finales, one angry viewer
New season shows to look forward to
Good and bad decisions from Upfronts Week
Arrow: good show, badly delayed
Gritty reality in Counties Manukau
Fringe: one of the greatest sci-fi shows?
Dear TV3: please bring back The Americans
Roses, lakes 'n' bikies: three reviews in one
Kidnap horror: Dragged behind a car like dummy
Girlfriend mourns after man dies in fire
Con artist failed to convince the Grim Reaper
Anti-terror soldier's throat slashed
All I want for my birthday is Maui
Polanksi: No to equality, yes to skimpy dresses
England claim honours on rollicking day
Manslaughter charge for quad bike tour owner

Newest First
Oldest First
For heavens sake, abolish the BSA. It's utterly useless. Simply preserve competition and let the audience vote with their remote.