the
facts
On May 27, 2006 at 10:00 am, Global Television aired an episode of the
program fatbluesky, a documentary/magazine-style
program targeted at youth that focussed on action sports, such as skateboarding,
extreme skiing, etc., and their related lifestyles and subcultures.
It included sports scenes and interviews with the participants.
The first segment was about skateboarder Dustin Montie, who, at one point,
was shown in the midst of a failed skateboard move. From a distance, the production microphone picked
up his comment, "Why did you have to throw that fucking thing?! Fuck!"
The second segment recounted the fishing exploits of a man named Joe and
his dog Kudo (it is relevant to note that Joe was not wearing a life jacket
at any point in the segment). The camera
focussed on different parts of, and things in, Joe's speed boat, including
a drink cooler whose lid Joe lifted to reveal numerous cans of beer. A few seconds later, the camera zoomed in on
a single can of beer sitting on the dashboard of the runabout and then panned
to Joe, who was steering the boat with a can in his hand. Grinning, he took a sip.
Joe was then shown with a fish he had just caught. Joe said, "That's a problem, the ocean, you
never know what you're gonna hook. It's
a big mystery. You know, I'm no biologist,
but there's some big fuckin' weird fish out there, I'll tell you that."
That comment was followed by more footage of Joe driving his boat, can
in hand. He said, "You know, if you
want to be a corporate climber, I got a saying for that: The higher a monkey gets up a tree, the better
you can see its ass!" There were then
a couple of scenes of Kudo in the boat, which were followed by Joe looking
into the camera and saying, "See, boys and girls, this is why you should be
fucking smart enough to scare up a couple thou' each month. If you're fucking working all the time, you're
an idiot. You're workin' for everyone
else but yourself. They're sucking
the fucking life outta ya. Dummy up,
figure out how you can score a coupla grand a month and you can do this every
fucking day."
There were more scenes of Joe driving his boat with a beer can in his hand.
As they arrived on land, Joe said to Kudo, "Kudo, we're gonna go ashore
to rape and pillage." That statement was followed by scenes of Joe
playing with Kudo on a beach and then diving off his boat to swim, all of
which were interspersed with additional scenes of Joe drinking from his beer
can.
It was the segment involving Joe and Kudo which concerned a viewer who
then wrote to the CBSC on May 27 (the full text of all correspondence can
be found in the Appendix):
I wish to inform you of a program
aired on Global TV Saturday, May 27th, Morning at 10:00 am. This show called Joe and Kudo featured a drunken
man driving a power boat, while drinking beer and not wearing any safety gear,
and using the f-word a lot, telling youth to figure out how they can live
like him. I only saw this clip towards
the end but am shocked and wondering if there is any controls [sic] left in this industry on morale [sic] and good example standards. Or for the sake of rights and freedoms is this
complaint going to be put off as another conservative person's nutty comment?
The complainant also wrote directly to Global on June 1 requesting a reply
to his complaint. A Global Viewer Relations
representative sent a response on June 2:
First, we would like to apologize
for the delay in response. As you can
imagine we are frequently inundated with emails and phone calls; however,
your concerns have not gone unheard.
The show you are referring to,
fatbluesky, has since been pulled
from conventional airing. I'd like
to apologize for the crude and inexcusable behaviour portrayed on the show,
and would also like to stress that we do not condone such actions. I'd like to thank you for your patience in the
matter, and we hope to continue providing quality viewing suitable for you
and your loved ones.
The complainant wrote back to the network that same day:
Great news to hear you pulled
the show. Will there be an on-air statement
of regret and explanation to youth of Global's non-support of this video's
message, and apology? It's the right
thing to do. Don't you think?
Global's Coordinator of Compliance Standards then
sent an additional reply on June 8:
Unfortunately, this program was
not screened before it went to air and we fully acknowledge our mistake and
apologize for the error. We do have
a screening process in place where most programs are carefully screened to
ensure that they do not contravene our industry guidelines or are simply not
in bad taste. However, in this instance
this program slipped through the cracks. We
have since pulled this program and we agree that the content is not suitable
for air. In future, we will make sure
this type of omission doesn't happen again.
As responsible broadcasters,
we are sensitive to your concerns and beliefs.
Our purpose and intention is to entertain and inform, not to offend
our viewers. We value and respect the
fact that you have an interest in our programming and that you were concerned
enough to let us know your opinions.
The complainant submitted his Ruling Request on June 15 with the following
note:
I am grateful to Global for pulling
the program, and [...] for the apology and assurance of better screening.
I did recommend that Global do the right thing and apologize on air
to the viewers (youth) at 10:00 am Sat. morning and state they don't uphold
this man's statements or use of such language.
That was not spoken about in their response.
the decision
The National Conventional Television Panel examined the complaint under
the following provisions of the Canadian Association of Broadcasters' (CAB)
Code of Ethics:
CAB Code
of Ethics, Clause 10 - Television
Broadcasting
a)
Programming which contains sexually explicit material or coarse or offensive
language intended for adult audiences shall not be telecast before the late
viewing period, defined as 9 pm to 6 am. [...]
CAB Code
of Ethics, Clause 11 - Viewer
Advisories
To assist
consumers in making their viewing choices, when programming includes mature
subject matter or scenes with nudity, sexually explicit material, coarse or
offensive language, or other material susceptible of offending viewers, broadcasters
shall provide a viewer advisory
a) at the beginning of, and after
every commercial break during the first hour of programming telecast in late
viewing hours which contains such material which is intended for adult audiences,
or
b) at the beginning of, and after
every commercial break during programming telecast outside of late viewing
hours which contains such material which is not suitable for children.
The National Conventional Television Panel Adjudicators reviewed all of
the correspondence and viewed a tape of the challenged episode of fatbluesky. The Panel concludes that Global violated each
of the foregoing Code provisions.
Coarse Language
The CBSC has consistently determined that the broadcast of the f-word constitutes
language "intended exclusively for adult audiences" and is therefore relegated
to post-Watershed broadcast, that is, after 9:00 pm and before 6:00 am.
Previous decisions enunciating this position include Showcase
Television re the movie Destiny to Order (CBSC Decision 00/01-0715,
January 16, 2002), WTN re the movie Wildcats
(CBSC Decision 00/01-0964, January 16, 2002), Bravo!
re Love on the Line (CBSC Decision 00/01-1050, May 3, 2002), Showcase
Television re The Cops (CBSC Decision 01/02-1076, February 28, 2003),
Showcase
Television re the movie Frankie Starlight (CBSC Decision 02/03-0682,
January 30, 2004) and Global
re ReGenesis ("Baby Bomb") (CBSC Decision 04/05-1996, January 20, 2006). The broadcast of the several examples of the
f-word in the matter at hand constitute a breach of the coarse or offensive
language component of Clause 10 of the CAB
Code of Ethics.
Adult
Themes
Until such time as the CAB Code of Ethics was revised in 2002, the standard establishing
the Watershed was found only in the present CAB
Violence Code, which came into effect on January 1, 1994. In its specific wording, it appeared to apply
only to programming that included violent
material assessed as being intended for adult audiences. It did not, however, take long for the CBSC
to observe that the purpose of the Watershed was to distinguish between all
types of programming suitable for children and families, on the one hand,
and those types suitable only for adults.
That principle was put by the Ontario Regional Panel in the first CBSC
decision that dealt with the Watershed, namely, CITY-TV
re Ed the Sock (CBSC Decision 94/95-0100, August 23, 1995).
Since
this is the Council's first decision dealing in any significant way with the
"watershed" hour, it is worth noting what it is and what purpose it serves.
In its literal sense, it, of course, denotes the line separating waters
flowing into different rivers or river basins.
Popularly, the term has been applied to threshold issues but the literal
meaning of the word gives the best visual sense of programming falling on
one side or the other of a defined line, in this case a time line.
Programming seen as suitable for children and families falls on the
early side of the line; programming targeted primarily for adults falls on
the late side of the line. It should
be noted that the definition of that time line varies from country to country,
from 8:30 p.m. in New Zealand to 10:30 p.m. in France. (Great Britain, Finland, South Africa and Australia
all share the Canadian choice of 9:00 p.m. as the watershed.)
In
Canada, the watershed was developed as a principal component of the 1993 Violence Code, establishing the hour before which no violent programming intended
for adult audiences would be shown. Despite the establishment of the watershed
for that purpose, the Panel has
reason to believe that broadcasters regularly consider this hour as a rough
threshold for other types of adult
programming.
That principle was followed in CFMT-TV
re an episode of The Simpsons
(CBSC Decision 94/95-0082, August 18, 1995), in which the Ontario Panel framed
the issue in slightly different terms: "Private broadcasters have voluntarily tended to extend this principle
to all programming containing any material which they believe is intended
for adult audiences, even if not of a violent nature." Other decisions, such as The
Comedy Network re an episode of Dream On (CBSC Decision 97/98-0571,
July 28, 1998), have continued in that vein.
When the CAB Code of Ethics was
significantly revised in 2002, that principle was added to Clause 10, which
specifically included references to "sexually explicit material or coarse
or offensive language intended for adult audiences." It is the view of this Panel that Clause 10
ought not to be understood as being limitative, that is, restricted to sexual
content and coarse language, any more than Article 3 of the Violence Code was limited by Panel interpretations
to violent content. Put in other terms,
this Panel considers that these provisions reflect the principle that any
form of content that can reasonably be understood as being exclusively intended
for adult audiences, whether on the foregoing nominate bases or on the basis
of its theme, must run after the start of the Watershed hour.
In the matter at hand, despite the fact that Joe, the irresponsible boat
driver, at one point addresses the youthful component of the viewing audience
(using the phrase "boys and girls", which may not have been literally aimed
at young children), the Panel considers that his outlandish and illegal antics
driving a boat while drinking are utterly inappropriate for a non-adult audience.
That neither the producers nor programmers viewed Joe's behaviour as
problematic is evident in the fact that he was seen grinning and smirking
each time he took a sip of his alcoholic beverage.
Moreover, there was no component of the program that served to point
out that Joe's behaviour was illegal and dangerous.
Although the complainant also raised the fact that Joe was driving
without donning "any safety gear", the Panel notes that that is not illegal. The rule is that there must be a regulation
flotation device for each person in the watercraft, but there is not a requirement
that they be worn. While, arguably,
the practice of drinking while driving is hardly a model for adults either,
the Panel appreciates that adults have powers of discernment, which younger
individuals may not. What would disarm
the youthful viewers still more is the trivialization of Joe's boating practices.
All things considered, the Panel views the boating display in this
episode of fatbluesky as an exclusively adult theme and one which ought not to
have been broadcast prior to the Watershed.
Consequently, it finds Global Television in breach of Clause 10 of
the CAB Code of Ethics.
Viewer Advisories
The requirement for viewer advisories in a program with such coarse language
is clear, whether it is aired before or after the Watershed hour. In WTN re the
movie Wildcats (CBSC Decision 00/01-0964, January 16, 2002), the Panel
explained
that,
with respect to programming including scenes of violence, coarse language,
nudity or sexual activity, children and families [must] be either protected
or informed with respect to their viewing choices.
On the one hand, parents need to know that programming directed at
their children (defined as being under 12 years of age) will be free from
inappropriate violence. Parents also
need to know that even programming not pointedly directed at their young children
will not contain elements of violence, coarse language, nudity, sexual content
or other potentially offensive content of which they are not advised.
Not only may they wish to make informed choices for their families
on the basis of that content but they may also have their own programming
tastes which do not extend to violence, coarse language, nudity or other such
matters. In the end, viewer advisories
[.] are important literacy tools for television viewers.
In the Wildcats
decision, which, like the matter at hand, involved the broadcast of coarse
language before the Watershed, the Panel concluded: "Had the broadcaster
aired Wildcats in its appropriate time-slot, that is, after 9:00 pm
due to the coarse language in the film, it would still have been required
to air viewer advisories." The National
Conventional Television Panel concludes similarly in the case of the fatbluesky episode and, in so doing, finds
a breach of Clause 11 of the CAB Code
of Ethics.
Broadcaster Responsiveness
The CBSC always assesses the broadcaster's responsiveness
to the complainant, which is a responsibility of membership in the Council.
It expects that response to be thoughtful and focussed on the substance
of the complaint. In the matter at hand, the Panel considers that
the response of the Viewer Relations department was especially helpful, in
the sense that the broadcaster went as far as it could in response, by "pull[ing it] from conventional airing [and]
apologiz[ing] for the crude and inexcusable behaviour portrayed on
the show." This was followed by a similar
commitment from Global's Coordinator of Compliance Standards, who acknowledged
the error and said candidly that "in this instance this program slipped through the cracks." She agreed that "the content is not suitable
for air [adding that] In future, we will make sure this type of omission doesn't
happen again." While the CBSC understands that the complainant
would have liked to see a voluntary on-air apology by Global Television, it
considers it important to acknowledge the candour of the broadcaster's representatives
and the constructive step taken by Global to remedy the underlying substantive
problem, which constitutes a sufficient reply to fulfill Global
Television's obligation of responsiveness on this occasion.
announcement of the decision
Global is required to: 1) announce the decision, in the following terms,
once during prime time within three days following the release of this decision
and once more within seven days following the release of this decision during
the time period in which this episode of fatbluesky was broadcast; 2) within the fourteen days following the
broadcasts of the announcements, to provide written confirmation of the airing
of the statement to the complainant who filed the Ruling Request; and 3) at
that time, to provide the CBSC with a copy of that written confirmation and
with air check copies of the broadcasts of the two announcements which must
be made by Global.
The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council has found
that Global Television breached the Canadian Association of Broadcasters Code of Ethics in its broadcast of an episode
of fatbluesky on May 27, 2006.
The Council found that the severity of the language
in, and the adult theme of, the episode of fatbluesky, which Global broadcast
at 10:00 on a Saturday morning breached the requirement of Clause 10 of the
CAB Code of Ethics that such content
not be aired before the industry-established Watershed hour of 9:00 pm.
The Council also concluded that, by failing to air any viewer advisories
during the course of the program, alerting potential viewers to the coarse
language and adult theme of the program, Global breached the provision in
Clause 11 of the CAB Code of Ethics requiring the use of viewer advisories.
This decision is a public document
upon its release by the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council.