Big Brother: 2005 | Refused-Classification.com

Big Brother (2005)

In June 2005 Liberal and National MP's launched a campaign against the latest series of Channel 10's BIG BROTHER. The result was a report by the ACMA that found that the show did broadcast material that was outside the MA category.

Senator The Hon Helen Coonan
Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts
Media Release.
073/05
21 June 2005

The Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Senator Helen Coonan, today said she would be writing to the Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) to clarify issues relating to complaints about the Big Brother program.

“I am aware that there have been complaints in relation to aspects of the reality television program ‘Big Brother’. The Government takes very seriously the issue of protection of children from exposure to program material that may be unsuitable,” Senator Coonan said.

“I will be asking the Australian Broadcasting Authority (soon to be known as the Australian Communications and Media Authority or ACMA) to look at whether there may have been a breach of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice relating to certain footage shown on the Big Brother program.

“I will also ask the ABA to look at whether the Code continues to provide sufficient safeguards in light of the increasing amount of reality television programming and whether measures to ensure effective compliance with the Code are appropriate.”

Both the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice and Codes of Practice for the national broadcasters include a complaints mechanism to address concerns about inappropriate material on television.

Complaints can be made to the broadcaster showing the particular program. If the response received from the broadcaster does not meet the concerns of the complainant or there isn’t a response within 60 days, the complainant can refer the matter to the ABA.

“Meanwhile, I have been advised that Network Ten has taken a number of steps to ensure the Big Brother program complies with the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice, particularly in relation to the classification requirements set out in the Code.

“Network Ten has advised they have appointed an experienced program classifier dedicated solely to the classification of Big Brother. The classifier checks each scene before an episode is broadcast in the relevant timeslot to ensure the material is within the requirements of the Code.

“I note that two of the Big Brother programs have been classified as MA15+. In accordance with the Code, these programs are not screened until after 9pm and display consumer advice alerting viewers to the content of the program.

“However, I will continue to monitor the situation and take further action if necessary once I have received advice from the regulator.”

***

Big Brother or big brothel? The Age 22.06.05

...... morals crusader Trish Draper says it's an outrage.

The political hoopla over Big Brother began during yesterday's meeting of Coalition MPs when Ms Draper complained about the "outrageous and disgusting" depictions of young people.

Not a stranger to controversy (Ms Draper was last year the star of her own saucy scandal when she was forced to repay the travel costs of taking her lover on a taxpayer-funded study tour), she said she had been inundated with complaints from residents in her electorate.

Ten issues apology, of sorts. The Age 23.06.05

Margaret Fearn from Network Ten.

"Network Ten apologises for any offence the late-night program, Big Brother Uncut, may have caused regarding the attitude of some male Big Brother housemates towards women,"

"Ten has taken extreme care with Big Brother Uncut to ensure it complies with the code." But the network accepted that some people had disagreed with the incident where the male housemate exposed his penis.

"Both housemates have since publicly asserted that no offence was intended nor taken."

***

NSW Legislative Council Hansard (Proof)
23.06.05
"BIG BROTHER" TELEVISION PROGRAM
Page: 40

Reverend the Hon. (Fred) Frederick John NILE, MLC
Current Member of the Legislative Council
Temporary Chair of Committees
Member of Christian Democratic Party (Fred Nile Group)

The Hon. John HATZISTERGOS, MLC
Current Member of the Legislative Council
Minister for Justice
Minister for Fair Trading
Minister Assisting the Minister for Commerce
Minister Assisting the Premier on Citizenship
Member of Australian Labor Party

Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE: I ask the Minister for Justice, representing the Minister for Community Services, a question without notice. Further to my question on notice of 8 June concerning the "Big Brother" television program, is it a fact that the head of Channel 10 corporate relations, Margaret Fearn, admits that the channel made an error over explicit scenes such as a "Big Brother" contestant rubbing his penis in the hair behind an unwilling, unknowing female contestant? Is it a fact that the President of Young Media Australia, Jane Roberts, claims that the penis incident broke the television industry code of conduct? As more than 33,720 children under 12 years of age and 65,070 children aged 13 to 17 years watched this obscene exposure incident on Channel 10, and as Channel 10 is based in Sydney, what action has the department taken to protect the children of New South Wales from moral danger?

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: This is more a question for the Federal Government, which controls these matters. In any event, I will refer the matter to the Minister for Community Services. Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: The question relates to the department protecting children in New South Wales.

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I do not quite know how the Minister is expected to go into every living room.

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: It was shown by Channel 10.

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: The channels are licensed by the Federal Government. In any event, I will refer the matter to the Minister for Community Services. I am sure she will provide the appropriate answer.

Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE: I ask a supplementary question. The point of the question was whether officers of the department have had discussions with Channel 10? The department has responsibility for the children of New South Wales.

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I very much doubt it. But I will include that as part of the question I will refer to the Minister for Community Services.

***

NSW Legislative Council Hansard
Subjects: Children; Terrorism; Television; Censorship
Speech Type: QWN; Deferred Answers; Questions Without Notice
Commentary: Asked by Hon. Fred Nile on 23 June 2005

BIG BROTHER EXPLICIT FOOTAGE Page: 17576 On 23 June 2005 Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile asked the Minister for Justice, representing the Minister for Community Services, a question without notice regarding Big Brother explicit footage. The Minister for Community Services provided the following response:

The regulation of television broadcasting is a Federal matter. I understand that the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts has referred the matter to the Australian Broadcasting Authority to assess whether there have been breaches of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice and whether the Code continues to provide sufficient safeguards.

Questions without notice concluded.

***

The funding of BIG BROTHER was also questioned in Estimates in the Queensland Parliament.

Queensland 51st Parliament
THURSDAY, 7 JULY 2005

ESTIMATES COMMITTEE C—EDUCATION AND THE ARTS
In Attendance
Hon. AM Bligh, Minister for Education and the Arts
Department of Education and the Arts
Mr M Watt, Senior Policy Advisor
Ms L Johnston, Senior Policy Advisor (Arts)
Mr K Smith, Director-General
Mr L Tabrett, Deputy Director-General, Arts Queensland
Ms R Logan, Director, Strategic Resource Management
Mr S Kessell, Director, Office of the Director-General
Mr R James, Chief Executive Officer, Pacific Film and Television Commission
Mr A Wagner, Chief Facilities Officer, Strategic Facilities Branch
Ms L Englert, Assistant Director-General, Office of Curriculum

Mr MESSENGER: And also I welcome members of the Education and Arts department. Minister, I refer you to page 1-73 of the MPS and funding allocated to the Pacific Film and Television Commission for domestic film and television production. It is in that first paragraph under ‘Assistance to the Arts’. I refer to $2.5 million which was loaned to Southern Star Endemol in 2001 for the production of the Big Brother series. What is the interest payable on that loan and what is the time frame for that repayment?

Ms BLIGH: It is a loan through the Queensland Treasury Corporation and the interest on the loan is determined by the QTC. I am just getting some further advice about what that is at the moment in number terms. I should say that QTC loans are generally lower than commercial rates. We will get the current rate. Can I just clarify that it is a variable rate so that is why I do not know what it is from day-today, but we will come back to you with what it is in the last quarter.

Mr MESSENGER: And the time frame for the payments?

Ms BLIGH: It will be the length of the loan. Again, I would have to get you some details on that.

Mr MESSENGER: I refer once again to the same page, 1-73 of the MPS, and funding allocated to the Pacific Film and Television Commission for domestic film and television production. I refer to the general guidelines for all Pacific Film and Television schemes which is published on the PFTC web site. I note that it states that applications relating to reality TV are not eligible for funding. How is it possible that the Big Brother series received funding or have the funding guidelines been breached?

Ms BLIGH: The detail in relation to the eligibility requirements for each of the programs for the PFTC are obviously extensive and complex. I might call Mr Robin James, who is the director of the PFTC, to outline the circumstances of this case in more detail. Mr James: In answer to your question, reality television is not eligible for investment from the production fund, which means we do not invest in reality television programs. That does not mean we do 38 Estimates Committee C—Education and the Arts 07 Jul 2005 not have the capacity to provide incentives, which we do, and to provide loans, which we also do, to cashflow that production.

Mr MESSENGER: Pursuant to that answer, there is a difference between investment and incentive payments?

Mr James: Yes, there is.

Mr MESSENGER: Could you detail the investment payments made to Big Brother to date and also any incentive payments?

Mr James: Just to clarify that, we do not invest in Big Brother; we do not invest in that production. We do offer incentive packages to Big Brother to attract it here. The components of that incentive package are twofold: one is a $2.5 million loan which is used to cashflow that production. That loan was first made in 2001-02, from memory. It was for 12 months and it has been rolled over each year as each new series of Big Brother has been produced. Application is made to have that loan renewed and we do that and we have done that in the past. The second component is an incentive package. Now, what happens with reality television, as happens with all production that is attracted to Queensland, is that we offer an incentive package to encourage the employment of Queensland cast and crew. Every major production expending more than $1 million in the state is eligible for that incentive package and that can range from big movies such as Aquamarine, which has just finished shooting for 20th Century Fox on the Gold Coast. That received an incentive package. It did not receive any investment, as all production that is not developed from this state does not receive any investment.

Mr MESSENGER: The general guidelines state that they apply to all PFTC schemes.

Mr James: It only applies to the investment scheme.

Mr MESSENGER: The investment rather than the incentive scheme?

Mr James: The PFTC has a whole range of schemes and the investment scheme only applies to productions that we have developed and then choose to invest in.

Mr MESSENGER: Minister, I refer you to page 1-73 of the MPS, once again funding allocated to the Pacific Film and Television Commission for domestic film and television production. Under the current guidelines, there appears to be no limits placed on the content of projects receiving funding. Now, is it correct to assume that a porn film, for example, could be successful in obtaining funding under these guidelines, whether investment or incentive?

Ms BLIGH: Firstly, I am very aware that there is a degree of community concern about some of the content of Big Brother Uncut, and I can appreciate some of that concern. As a television program, Big Brother Uncut or, indeed, any other television program is required to meet Commonwealth government guidelines for television timing and content. The responsibility for what can be put to air for television is not a state responsibility. It is governed by the Australian Communications and Media Authority—which was formerly the ABA, the Australian Broadcasting Authority—which is the authority that deals with unsuitable content issues. I understand that at least one complaint has been made to that federal authority and it is investigating that complaint. Obviously I look forward to hearing the outcome of that investigation.

Mr MESSENGER: I understand that there is a petition being started by the member for Maryborough against the state government investing or providing incentive payments for programs of dubious content quality. Minister, I refer you to page 1-73 of the MPS and funding allocation to the Pacific Film and Television Commission for domestic film and television production.

***

Push to ban 'offensive' TV shows. The Age 17.08.05

Television programs considered offensive could be ordered off the air by the federal Communications Minister under a radical plan to be considered by the Howard Government.

Up to 20 Coalition MPs are backing a push for amendments to the Broadcasting Act that would give the Government power to ban programs that repeatedly breach their classification guidelines.

South Australian Liberal MP Trish Draper, who is spearheading the push, will meet Communications Minister Helen Coonan tomorrow to discuss the issue.

Trash Draper
"We don't have that power now, but once we do have that ability, the self-regulators on commercial free-to-air will certainly be examining the code a lot more closely so that they don't end up getting their programs yanked from the air.

"I am concerned about children in Australia, quite frankly, and in my electorate, and there are at least 20 of us in the parliamentary party who will be pushing for this."

Your Say. The Age 17.08.05

***

Julia Gillard
Doorstop Interview Transcript - Parliament House, Canberra -
17th August 2005
E & OE

JOURNALIST: On another issue there is a group of Coalition MPs who are agitating for changes to the Broadcast Act to give the Communications Minister the power to pull off inappropriate material on free to air television, do you think it is appropriate for a politician to be arbiter of things like that?

JULIA GILLARD: This is a matter at the end of the day, to be dealt with by our communications spokesperson but as I understand it we have expert advisory groups on censorship issues for good reason.

JOURNALIST: What do you estimate that black hole to be, that you are talking about, to be at?

JULIA GILLARD: Well certainly there has been a black hole punched of $237 million as a result of the back flip on one medication, Lipitor. If Minister Abbott makes any further exemptions the black hole will just get bigger and what we fear is Treasurer Costello, when he stops yawning during Minister Abbott's speeches, will tell him to fill that black hole by further cuts in health.

JOURNALIST: Are the Coalition MPs who are pushing for changes to the Broadcast Act, are they prudes in your view?

JULIA GILLARD: I wouldn't want to comment it's not my area of policy directly but I am sure Senator Conroy will only be too pleased to tell you all about it.

JOURNALIST: Have you seen it, the program they are talking about, what are your personal thoughts?

JULIA GILLARD: And they are talking about…?

JOURNALIST: Big Brother.

JULIA GILLARD: I am not a Big Brother aficionado. I am more a watcher of The Bill actually and I would have to say I think it is a tragedy it has been taken off Saturday nights and we have only one episode of The Bill per week. I have seen little bits of Big Brother and Big Brother Uncut but I really haven't got a view to put today about censorship matters, they are really matters for Senator Conroy.

***

Kim Beazley
Doorstop Interview Transcript - Canberra -
17th August 2005
E & O E - PROOF ONLY

JOURNALIST: There's a proposal from the Liberal back bench that the Communications Minister be given the power to pull programs off air, television programs off air after repeated breaches of censorship laws, (inaudible)

BEAZLEY: I don't think the Members of Parliament and the Coalition, and you've seen the way they behave in the House, are arbiters of good taste in our community. If you want to see a bunch of disrespectful people look at their Senators. Look at the behaviour of people like Heffernan and McGauran - absolutely disgraceful. So, they're not the arbiters I don't think, of public standards of respect. The ABA should be however, and the ABA should get the powers. I don't like programs that disrespect Australian people or disrespect their taste but there's a proper authority to deal with it and it's the ABA, not the Minister. So, if the ABA doesn't have the power the ABA should get it.

***

Too hot for TV. Today Tonight 18.08.05

Nationals MP Paul Neville said that if a television station did not observe the industry code of conduct, there was a case for government intervention.

He suggested the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) should have sweeping powers to force low-grade programs off the air, instead of the power being in the hands of politicians.

"When a series is challenged, the episode that is being challenged should be reviewed by the ACMA," Mr Neville said. "And until it's reviewed, the series suspended."

Hands off our code. The Age 18.08.05

Television executives reacted angrily yesterday to a push to allow programs considered offensive to be ordered off the air, as the proposal gathered momentum among MPs.

Channel Ten spokeswoman Margaret Fearn said giving a minister the ability to remove programs would set a dangerous precedent. "It would be extremely damaging to give the Government the right to proactively take programs off the air."

She defended Big Brother, saying that it ran at 9.40pm — when MA-rated programs can start at 9 — and carried warnings about its content.

"We have a dedicated classifier on-site at Big Brother to make sure it complies with the code," she said.

A Channel Nine spokeswoman said the code's guidelines had evolved with changing public mores over the years. The station was "extremely diligent" in making sure that their programs observed the guidelines.

Seven spokesman Simon Francis said the fact Ten was facing some bother over Big Brother reflected the strength and integrity of the code.

Labor leader Kim Beazley is also opposed to the proposal. He suggested the Australian Broadcasting Authority be given the power to decide what should be broadcast. "I don't like programs that disrespect Australian people … (but) I don't think that members of Parliament in the Coalition … are arbiters of good taste in our community.

"If you want to see a bunch of disrespectful people, look at their senators, look at the behaviour of people like (Bill) Heffernan and (Julian) McGauran."

Hands off the TV remote, minister. The Age Editorial 19.08.05

There is no small irony in the fact that a television show called Big Brother has provoked a call for the Communications Minister to be given the power to ban programs that repeatedly breach classification guidelines.

George Orwell, the author of political fables that warned of a world in which government sought total control over people's lives, would relish the situation. In 1984, he depicted a futuristic, society watched over by an all-powerful police state led by the original "Big Brother". Now South Australian backbencher Trish Draper has watched the show that appropriated Orwell's character and declared herself to be "disgusted, just disgusted". She wants amendments to the Broadcasting Services Act to protect public morality and has been joined in her campaign by colleagues such as Nationals MP Paul Neville who was appalled by scenes on the late-night show. "Free-to-air television is supposed to have a code of conduct," he said. "A row of beds in a circle with young nubile girls and excited blokes and saying that 'oh no, we're just reflecting community standards', is absolute twaddle."

Government MPs may be right to be appalled by the sexually explicit nature of the program — although it could be argued that the lack of intelligent programming generally is more offensive — but that does not give them the right to create a nanny state in which a minister decides what programs are suitable for television. As Opposition Leader Kim Beazley observed this week, "Australians don't elect politicians to be arbiters of taste and morality." There is undoubtedly room for regulation, which was the reason for establishing the Australian Communications and Media Authority, the successor to the Australian Broadcasting Authority. Its charter is to develop and uphold broadcasting standards and codes of practice. If the Government is serious about the need to ensure that community standards are not offended, it should strengthen this body. It could begin by appointing a replacement for David Flint who resigned as chairman of the ABA more than a year ago. It must resist the temptation to dictate how citizens spend their time and what they can watch on television. To even contemplate such changes hints at an arrogance born of the Coalition's newly acquired control of both houses of Parliament. The Government must resist this temptation. It cannot allow Big Brother's shadow to extend beyond the television screen.

Just who is the Big Brother? The Age 20.08.05

There's something mildly pathetic about the proposal by a group led by the South Australian Liberal to give the Federal Government power to ban every program that repeatedly breaches its classification guidelines. In essence, the proposal is a sign of a conservative political elite that senses its own powerlessness in the face of a libertarianism, which, first, it doesn't understand and, second, it can't tolerate.

Despite nine years in power for the social conservatives, Australian society at large is as liberal as ever: women enjoy the right to have abortions, with the overwhelming support of the public; premarital sex, a matter of debate in conservative circles, is a simple fact among young Australians, trumpeted lasciviously on the covers of FHM, Cleo and Cosmopolitan; and, as a recent survey showed, homosexuality is increasingly of little concern to the educated classes.

All this, no doubt, infuriates the Trish Drapers and Alan Cadmans. Unable to ban those social attitudes that disagree with them, they are trying to do the next best thing: ban the television shows that display some of the more aesthetically displeasing consequences of those attitudes.

***

Australian Government
Australian Communications and Media Authority
16 September 2005
MR 23/2005

ACMA finds Big Brother Uncut in breach of code

The Australian Communications and Media Authority has found Network Ten licensees in Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne, Perth and Sydney breached the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice for broadcasts of Big Brother Uncut.

Breaches were found in two of the three episodes of the program investigated by ACMA.

The breaches were of clause 2.4 of the code, which requires that material be classified in accordance with the Television Classification Guidelines in the code.

Big Brother Uncut is classified MA, meaning it is suitable for viewing only by persons aged 15 years and over and may only be screened after 9 pm. The investigation found material was screened that was in excess of the MA classification.

Other material broadcast in Big Brother Uncut was considered to approach the limit of content permitted at the MA classification level.

‘MA classified material is the strongest permitted on free-to-air television. Because of this, broadcasters are obliged to exercise particular care in selecting material for this category,’ said Lyn Maddock, Acting ACMA Chair. ‘ACMA has found that on two of the occasions it investigated, Network Ten did not take sufficient care in selecting material for Big Brother Uncut.’

One breach, in the episode broadcast on 30 May 2005, involved what ACMA considered a gratuitous and demeaning portrayal of nudity. This scene depicted a male participant in the program massaging a female participant’s shoulders. The female was unaware that the male’s penis was exposed and near the back of her head.

The other breach, in the 13 June 2005 episode, was for very coarse language that was not suitable for persons aged 15 years or over. A group of males composed a song containing references to fetishistic and degrading sexual behaviour. The impact of the language was such that it was not considered suitable for 15 year olds.

ACMA is aware that Network Ten has taken steps to review the program’s production process in response to criticism about some of the behaviour of male participants in the 2005 series. Network Ten has offered to advise ACMA of the outcomes of that review including any new procedures that may be implemented as a result.

‘While welcoming the steps already taken by the licensee, ACMA will further discuss appropriate measures with Network Ten. Action requested of Network Ten by ACMA will be geared towards ensuring future breaches of the MA classification provisions do not occur,’ said Lyn Maddock.

If Network Ten fails to provide appropriate undertakings, ACMA will consider imposing a licence condition on the Network Ten licensees.

The full investigation report will be made available on the ACMA website following consideration of any comments on the text of the report by Network Ten, as required by law.

Media contact: Donald Robertson ACMA Media Manager on (02) 9334 7980.

BACKGROUNDER

The investigation

The Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) initiated an investigation into three episodes of Big Brother Uncut on 23 June 2005. The ABA made its decision to investigate in response to considerable public comment on the contents of the program. The three episodes of the program examined were broadcast on 30 May 2005, 6 June 2005 and 13 June 2005.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority took over the role and responsibilities of the ABA on 1 July 2005.

The licensees that are the subject of the investigation are: Network Ten (Adelaide) Pty Limited, Network Ten (Brisbane) Pty Limited, Network Ten (Melbourne) Pty Limited, Network Ten (Perth) Pty Limited and Network Ten (Sydney) Pty Limited.

The investigation report is currently being considered by the licensees under section 180 of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992. Section 180 requires that persons likely to be adversely affected by a report be given an opportunity to make comment prior to publication.

The Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice

The Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2004 is the code of practice developed by the commercial television industry and registered by ACMA. Licensees are expected to comply fully with the code.

The code contains the Television Classification Guidelines, which set out the classification categories permitted on commercial free-to-air television, and define the type of material that is suitable for each category.

MA is the strongest category of material that is permitted on commercial television (apart from material containing violent content, for which a different classification applies). For material to be suitable for the MA classification, it must be suitable for viewing by persons aged 15.

The relevant MA criteria are:

The Mature Audience (MA) Classification

5. Material classified MA is suitable for viewing only by persons aged 15 years or over because of the intensity and/or frequency of sexual depictions, or coarse language, adult themes or drug use.. . .

5.2 Sex and nudity: Visual depiction of intimate sexual behaviour (which may only be discreetly implied or discreetly simulated) or of nudity only where relevant to the story line or program context. However, a program or program segment will not be acceptable where the subject matter serves largely or wholly as a vehicle for gratuitous, exploitative or demeaning portrayal of sexual behaviour or nudity. Exploitative or non-consenting sexual relations must not be depicted as desirable.

5.3 Language: The use of very coarse language must be appropriate to the story line or program context and not overly frequent or impactful.…

5.6 Adult themes: The treatment of strong themes should be justified by the story line or program context.

Clause 2.4 of the code requires that material for broadcast be classified in accordance with these guidelines:

2.4 All other material for broadcast: Subject to Clauses 2.3 and 2.4.1, all other material for broadcast must be classified according to the Television Classification Guidelines (set out in Appendix 4) or, where applicable, the stricter requirements of Section 3: Program Promotions and Section 6: Classification and Placement of Commercials.

The program

Big Brother is a reality television program that was broadcast by Network Ten licensees. The program presents a group of housemates sharing a house for approximately three months, and competing for a cash prize. Big Brother Uncut is an MA classified version of the program, and contains content that would not be suitable for broadcast in other time periods.

ACMA enforcement powers for code breaches

Having found that a breach of a code has occurred, ACMA can request an informal undertaking from a licensee that certain steps will be taken to ensure no future breach of a particular code provision occurs. A wide range of possible undertakings could be requested.

The scope for a licence condition is very broad. Compliance with the code itself could be made a licence condition.

The imposition of a licence condition invokes some of ACMA’s stronger powers of sanction. Failure to comply with a licence condition allows ACMA to issue a notice directing compliance with the condition. Failure to comply with a notice means ACMA can suspend or cancel a licence, or refer the matter to the DPP for prosecution and possible imposition of a fine by the Federal Court.

***

Australian Government
Australian Communications and Media Authority
5 October 2005
MR 28/2005

TEN to change Big Brother Uncut following ACMA Report

Network Ten is to change its procedures regarding Big Brother Uncut following the finding of breaches of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice July 2004 (the code) by the Australian Communications and Media Authority.

ACMA has obtained undertakings from The Ten Group Pty Ltd (Ten) that will change the way future Big Brother Uncut programs will be prepared and classified. The undertakings should ensure that future programs do not contain material that exceeds the MA15+ classification criteria.

‘The measures to be implemented by Ten will provide safeguards against the broadcast of inappropriately classified material,’ said Chris Cheah, ACMA Acting Chair. ‘ACMA will monitor the effectiveness of Ten’s undertakings and may decide to impose additional conditions on Ten’s broadcasting licences if concerns about compliance with the code arise again,’

A breach of such a licence condition could attract serious punitive sanctions.

The undertakings by Ten follow ACMA’s finding that Ten licensees breached the Commercial Television Code of Practice in relation to episodes of Big Brother Uncut broadcast on 30 May 2005 and 13 June 2005. ACMA found the programs were not classified in accordance with the Television Classification Guidelines contained in the code.

Ten has advised that Big Brother production processes have been reviewed to help prevent sexually demeaning behaviour occurring and Ten will ensure that there is sufficient time for editing future programs prior to broadcast. Two classifiers, including Ten’s senior classifier, will separately assess each program prior to broadcast. Ten also will provide confidential weekly reports to ACMA about any viewer complaints that Big Brother Uncut breached the code.

The report of the investigation is now available on ACMA’s web site.

Media contact: Donald Robertson, ACMA Media Manager on (02) 9334 7980.

Backgrounder

ACMA investigation

On 23 June 2005 the Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) commenced an investigation of whether episodes of Big Brother Uncut broadcast on 30 May 2005, 6 June 2005 and 13 June 2005 were in breach of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice July 2004 (the code). ACMA assumed responsibility for the investigation from 1 July 2005.

The investigation was undertaken in respect of Network Ten (Adelaide) Pty Limited, Network Ten (Melbourne) Pty Limited, Network Ten (Perth) Pty Limited, Network Ten (Sydney) Pty Limited and Network Ten (Brisbane) Pty Limited, which are commercial television licensees operated by Ten.

On 16 September 2005, ACMA published its decision that each of the licensees breached clause 2.4 of the code.

Ten’s undertakings

In responding to ACMA’s preliminary view that breaches of the code had occurred, Ten advised that it had taken steps to prevent further breaches:

Undertakings already given

Ten will conduct an extensive two-day education program for the production crew before the next season of Big Brother to outline the requirements of the MA15+ classification, with a focus on the breach findings. We will reinforce the training with follow-up visits to the production studios once the show has commenced Ten will develop detailed internal classification guidelines for the Big Brother production crew based on ACMA’s findings. Ten will give a copy of ACMA’s final investigation report, together with an explanation of the decision, to relevant production staff and management at Ten and Endemol Southern Star. Ten will report to ACMA before the commencement of the next season of Big Brother on the network’s compliance with the training and information program. back to top

Additional measures already implemented

We have initiated an independent review of the Big Brother production process by Associate Professor Catherine Lumby and Ms Karen Wilils, Director of the NSW Rape Crisis Centre. The review looked at whether the necessary precautions are taken to prevent sexually demeaning behaviour in the house. In July 2005 Assoc. Professor Lumby conducted a half-day workshop with Big Brother production staff. All senior production staff attended. During the workshop Assoc. Professor Lumby discussed existing procedures, rules, guidelines, codes and operational practices used in producing Big Brother programs. Ways of improving those protocols were also discussed in the context of events that could and have occurred on the show. We also undertake to provide a copy of the report to ACMA, and implement the recommendations of the review, including: Improve codes of conduct and housemate training to increase awareness of sexual harassment, assault and bullying. Formalise the system of monitoring housemate behaviour from the control room by drawing up guidelines for appropriate behaviour. The control room will use the guidelines to identify risky situations and immediately refer them to production executives for advice. Identifying problematic behaviour at an early stage, and intervening if necessary, will have a positive impact on the nature and context of material that is available for broadcast. Subsequently, ACMA obtained additional undertakings from Ten:

Further Undertakings

Ten undertakes that Big Brother Uncut production processes will be amended to allow time for classifiers to view the program, and that time and production resources will be available to recompile the program if necessary for classification purposes. Ten will compile Big Brother Uncut in enough time to allow the program to be viewed in its entirety so that any required classification changes can be made before the program airs. This will include enough time to modify and revise all or part of the program as necessary.

In any event, Ten will ensure that all classification matters are fully considered in accordance with Undertaking 2.

In 2006 two classifiers will separately assess each episode of Big Brother Uncut. The first classifier will be the full-time classifier of the Big Brother programs who is based on the set in Queensland. The second classifier will be Network Ten’s senior classifier, Sally Stockbridge.

For the duration of Big Brother Uncut in 2006, we will provide a weekly report to ACMA on any Code complaints we receive about the program and Network Ten’s response to them. The report will be provided on a confidential basis in a form agreed between Network Ten and ACMA. This information will provide an alternative and immediate form of monitoring that demonstrates Network Ten’s ongoing compliance with the Code, as well as any issues of concern to the public.

We could provide additional reporting to ACMA on request.

***

Australian Government
Australian Communications and Media Authority
MR 28/2006
ACMA finds further episode of Big Brother Uncut breached TV code

ACMA finds further episode of Big Brother Uncut breached TV code The Australian Communications and Media Authority has found that a third episode of the 2005 series of Big Brother Uncut breached the Commercial Television Code of Practice (the code).

ACMA investigated the episode broadcast on 4 July 2005 after receiving two complaints from members of the public that had not been resolved by Network Ten. ACMA has found that the episode breached clause 2.4 of the code which requires that material be classified in accordance with the Television Classification Guidelines. In September 2005, ACMA found that episodes broadcast on 30 May and 13 June 2005 had also breached clause 2.4 of the code.

ACMA considers that the 4 July 2005 episode contained strong adult themes, combined with other classifiable elements such as sexual references, implied sexual behaviour and full frontal or partial nudity, with a cumulative intensity beyond that which could be justified by the story line or program context. ACMA found the episode as a whole was beyond the level of suitability for the MA(15+) classification.

‘The classification scheme set out in the code reflects well-accepted community standards and provides safeguards against the broadcast of inappropriate material,’ said Chris Chapman, ACMA Chairman. ‘It is imperative that broadcasters stay within its limits.’

Following the September 2005 breach findings, the Ten Network provided ACMA with undertakings about the approach it will take in classifying the 2006 series of Big Brother Uncut. The undertakings are intended to ensure that future programs do not contain material that exceeds the MA(15+) classification criteria.

‘ACMA welcomes Ten’s cooperation over the course of these investigations, and acknowledges the breadth of Ten’s undertakings for future series of Big Brother Uncut,’ said Mr Chapman. ‘We consider these undertakings also address factors which contributed to the code breach found by ACMA in its investigation into the 4 July 2005 episode. ACMA will be looking to Ten to deliver on these undertakings for future series of the program.

‘Given the time that has elapsed, ACMA has committed to ensuring that its investigation procedures are both timely and fair. We will be looking at our Big Brother Uncut investigations and other investigations to identify improvements we can make to our processes, particularly in relation to the timeframes involved.’

ACMA has published its investigation report. Copies of the report are available on ACMA’s web site.

Media contact: Donald Robertson, ACMA Media Manager on (02) 9334 7980.

Backgrounder
ACMA investigation

In response to two written complaints, ACMA commenced an investigation of whether the 4 July 2005 episode of Big Brother Uncut was in breach of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice July 2004 (the code).

The complaints were initially made to the relevant broadcasting stations, as required under the code. However, the complainants were dissatisfied with the stations’ response and subsequently referred their complaint to ACMA for investigation.

The investigation was undertaken in respect of Network Ten (Brisbane) Pty Limited and Network Ten (Perth) Pty Limited.

Previous investigations into Big Brother Uncut

The Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) initiated an investigation into three episodes of Big Brother Uncut on 23 June 2005. The ABA made its decision to investigate in response to considerable public comment on the contents of the program. The three episodes of the program examined were broadcast on 30 May 2005, 6 June 2005 and 13 June 2005.

On 16 September 2005, ACMA announced its findings in the investigation into three episodes of the 2005 series of Big Brother Uncut. ACMA found that episodes broadcast on 30 May and 13 June 2005 had also breached clause 2.4 of the code.

On 5 October 2005, ACMA announced its response to Ten’s undertakings (as discussed in further detail below).

The Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice

The Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice is the code of practice developed by the commercial television industry and registered by ACMA. Licensees are expected to comply fully with the code.

The relevant MA criteria are:

The Mature Audience (MA) Classification

5. Material classified MA is suitable for viewing only by persons aged 15 years or over because of the intensity and/or frequency of sexual depictions, or coarse language, adult themes or drug use.

5.6 Adult themes: The treatment of strong themes should be justified by the story line or program context.

Clause 2.4 of the code requires that material for broadcast be classified in accordance with these guidelines:

2.4 All other material for broadcast: Subject to Clauses 2.3 and 2.4.1, all other material for broadcast must be classified according to the Television Classification Guidelines (set out in Appendix 4) or, where applicable, the stricter requirements of Section 3: Program Promotions and Section 6: Classification and Placement of Commercials.

The program

Big Brother is a reality television program that was broadcast by Network Ten licensees. The program presents a group of housemates sharing a house for approximately three months, and competing for a cash prize. Big Brother Uncut is an MA classified version of the program, and contains content that would not be suitable for broadcast in other time periods.

The complaints process

Under the code, primary responsibility for the resolution of complaints rests with the broadcasters themselves. The Broadcasting Services Act 1992 lays down a general procedure for complaint handling whereby complainants are required to approach the broadcaster first, who, in turn, is obliged to respond. However, if a complainant does not receive a response within 60 days, or considers the response received to be inadequate, the matter can be referred to ACMA for investigation. ACMA refers to these as unresolved complaints and must investigate complaints so made.

ACMA enforcement powers for code breaches

ACMA may also decide to impose an additional condition on a licence. Additional licence conditions may be geared to corrective action in respect of a breach, or reducing the likelihood of future breaches. The scope for a licence condition is very broad. Compliance with the code itself could be made a licence condition.

Ten’s undertakings

Following ACMA’s breach findings in September 2005, Ten provided a number of undertakings to ACMA.

Undertakings

* Ten will conduct an extensive two-day education program for the production crew before the next season of Big Brother to outline the requirements of the MA15+ classification, with a focus on the breach findings. We will reinforce the training with follow-up visits to the production studios once the show has commenced.

* Ten will develop detailed internal classification guidelines for the Big Brother production crew based on ACMA’s findings. Ten will give a copy of ACMA’s final investigation report, together with an explanation of the decision, to relevant production staff and management at Ten and Endemol Southern Star.

* Ten will report to ACMA before the commencement of the next season of Big Brother on the network’s compliance with the training and information program.

* In July 2005 Assoc. Professor Lumby conducted a half-day workshop with Big Brother production staff. All senior production staff attended. During the workshop Assoc. Professor Lumby discussed existing procedures, rules, guidelines, codes and operational practices used in producing Big Brother programs. Ways of improving those protocols were also discussed in the context of events that could and have occurred on the show.

We also undertake to provide a copy of the report to ACMA, and implement the recommendations of the review, including:

* Improve codes of conduct and housemate training to increase awareness of sexual harassment, assault and bullying.

*Formalise the system of monitoring housemate behaviour from the control room by drawing up guidelines for appropriate behaviour. The control room will use the guidelines to identify risky situations and immediately refer them to production executives for advice.

* Identifying problematic behaviour at an early stage, and intervening if necessary, will have a positive impact on the nature and context of material that is available for broadcast.

Subsequently, ACMA obtained additional undertakings from Ten:

Further Undertakings

1. Ten undertakes that Big Brother Uncut production processes will be amended to allow time for classifiers to view the program, and that time and production resources will be available to recompile the program if necessary for classification purposes.

Ten will compile Big Brother Uncut in enough time to allow the program to be viewed in its entirety so that any required classification changes can be made before the program airs. This will include enough time to modify and revise all or part of the program as necessary.

In any event, Ten will ensure that all classification matters are fully considered in accordance with Undertaking 2.

2. In 2006 two classifiers will separately assess each episode of Big Brother Uncut. The first classifier will be the full-time classifier of the Big Brother programs who is based on the set in Queensland. The second classifier will be Network Ten’s senior classifier, Sally Stockbridge.

3. For the duration of Big Brother Uncut in 2006, we will provide a weekly report to ACMA on any Code complaints we receive about the program and Network Ten’s response to them. The report will be provided on a confidential basis in a form agreed between Network Ten and ACMA.

This information will provide an alternative and immediate form of monitoring that demonstrates Network Ten’s ongoing compliance with the Code, as well as any issues of concern to the public.

We could provide additional reporting to ACMA on request.

***

Australian Government
Australian Communications and Media Authority
Investigation Report No. 1579

File No: 2005/2138
Licensee Network: Ten (Brisbane) Pty Ltd and Network Ten (Perth) Pty Ltd
Station: TVQ and NEW
Type of Service: Commercial Television Broadcasting Service
Name of Program: Big Brother Uncut
Date/s of Broadcast: 4 July 2005
Relevant Legislation/Code: Clause 2.4 of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice and clauses 5.2 and 5.6 of Appendix 4 to the Code.

Investigation findings

The licensees breached clause 2.4 of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice (for broadcast of material that is not classified according to the Television Classification Guidelines) in broadcasting the 4 July 2005 episode of Big Brother Uncut.

The episode under consideration is characterised by strong adult themes which are not justified by the program context.

In addition, the high intensity of these themes, and the frequency with which they are depicted, puts the program beyond the limits of suitability for viewers aged 15 years.

The program therefore does not satisfy clause 5.6 of Appendix 4 to the Code, or the overarching requirement at clause 5 of Appendix 4 to the Code, that material must be suitable for viewers aged 15 years.

The complaint

1. On 9 August 2005, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) received a written letter of complaint concerning an episode of the program Big Brother Uncut broadcast by Network Ten (Brisbane) Pty Ltd at 9.40 pm on Monday, 4 July 2005 and an episode of the program Big Brother Up Late broadcast by Network Ten (Brisbane) Pty Ltd at 11.40 pm on Friday, 8 July 2005. The latter program forms the basis of a discrete investigation and is being considered separately by ACMA1.

2. On 11 November 2005, ACMA received a second complaint concerning the 4 July 2005 episode of the program Big Brother Uncut, broadcast by Network Ten (Perth) Pty Ltd.

3. In regard to the Big Brother Uncut program, both complainants considered sexual references in the program to be inappropriate for the MA time slot. One complainant also considered implied masturbation by female contestants and a male contestant pretending to smoke a tampon, to be offensive and inappropriate for the MA time slot.

4. Not satisfied with the response provided by the licensees, the complainants forwarded the matter to ACMA for investigation.

The program

5. In a submission dated 1 September 2005, Network Ten (Sydney) Pty Ltd (Ten), on behalf of the licensees, described the Big Brother series as follows:

Big Brother is a reality-based program that records the daily experiences of a group of young Australians in a shared household environment.

The motivation behind Big Brother Uncut is to provide viewers with a complete picture of life in the Big Brother house, and the true characters of the housemates. This is important because some crucial behaviour in the Big Brother house is unsuitable to be aired in the PG programs. However, this behaviour is often an important part of the household environment, and critical to the audience’s perception of particular housemates and relationships.

6. The Big Brother series is based on a contrived situation in which a group of young adults share a living space for a period of time with no contact with the outside world, and in competition for a cash prize. Cameras situated throughout the living space record the housemate’s movements 24 hours a day.

7. Big Brother consists of a suite of programs broadcast in various classification zones, using different portions of the footage available.

8. Big Brother Uncut is an MA classified program, which screened on Mondays at 9.40pm.

1 ACMA Investigation number 1593.

9. In relation to Big Brother Uncut, Ten states that it is critical to viewer perceptions of the participants to be able to show material unsuitable for viewing in earlier timeslots. The choice of material selected for this purpose has resulted in the Big Brother Uncut component of the series appearing to have been deliberately constructed to be of high impact and intensity.

10. This series of Big Brother programs was promoted as being more controversial than any of the previous series. In its 23 September 2005 letter to ACMA, Ten stated that single housemates were selected to add to the sexual tension and drama of the house. The Big Brother Uncut program brought together the high intensity material generated as a result of the interactions between this group of participants.

11. The episode under consideration contains extensive sexual references, implied or simulated sexual behaviour, adult themes, full frontal nudity and coarse language. While the episode contains some other components, the sexual elements, particularly the sexual references and themes, are the strongest elements within the episode.

12. The broadcast of the episode in question was preceded by an information screen setting out the classification category and consumer advice for ‘Frequent Coarse Language’, ‘Sexual References’ and ‘Nudity.’

Assessment

13. In assessing compliance with the Code, ACMA considered a recording of the episode and submissions on the episode’s compliance with the Code provisions, supplied by Network Ten (Sydney) Pty Ltd on behalf of the licensees on 2 September 2005 and 27 November 2005.

14. The complainants’ concerns raise questions as to whether the program contains material unsuitable for the MA classification. The complaints have therefore been assessed against clause 2.4 of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice and clause 5.2 and 5.6 of Appendix 4 to the Code.

Relevant code provisions

15. The Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice July 2005 (the Code) contains the following provisions:

16. At Appendix 4, the relevant MA classification provisions are:

The Mature Audience (MA) Classification

5.2 Sex and nudity: Visual depiction of intimate sexual behaviour (which may only be discreetly implied or discreetly simulated) or of nudity only where relevant to the story line or program context. However, a program or program segment will not be acceptable where the subject matter serves largely or wholly as a vehicle for gratuitous, exploitative or demeaning portrayal of sexual behaviour or nudity. Exploitative or non-consenting sexual relations must not be depicted as desirable. …

5.6 Adult themes: The treatment of strong themes should be justified by the story line or program context.

17. Apart from material with violent content, to which the Adult Violence (AV 15+) classification applies, MA sets the upper limit in terms of the strength of material that is able to be broadcast on commercial free-to-air television.

18. The Code also sets out ‘classification zones’, which prescribe the times at which material with a particular classification can be screened. For MA classified material, the Code states:

Mature audience (MA) classification zones

The MA classification zone is all days between 9.00pm and 5.00am. In MA zones, any material which qualifies for a television classification may be broadcast, except that material classified AV may only be broadcast after 9.30pm.

19. Apart from AV15+, the MA classification is the most limited in terms of permissible broadcast hours, in recognition of the fact that MA material is the strongest permitted on commercial free-to-air television (apart from AV material). This time restriction for MA classified material is based on the requirement at s.123(3A)(d) of the Act, which states:

123(3A) In developing codes of practice . . .industry groups . . . must ensure that: … (d) films classified as “MA” may be broadcast only between the hours of 9 pm on a day and 5 am on the following day.

ACMA’s consideration

20. Clause 5 of the Television Classification Guidelines (Appendix 4 to the Code) sets out the overarching requirement that, in order to meet the MA classification, the program must be suitable for viewing by persons aged 15 years and over. The individual classification elements listed in clause 5 provide specific guidance in relation to this overarching test.

21. In assessing whether material meets that overarching test, the provision states that key considerations are the intensity and/or frequency of the classifiable elements, such as sex, nudity and adult themes which are pervasive throughout the episode in question.

22. Issues of intensity and frequency require the program be considered as a whole. This means that consideration must be given to the overall frequency and intensity of the classifiable elements throughout the program, as well as in particular scenes.

23. ACMA has therefore approached its assessment of the episode by considering both:

a. the program as a whole, which is a high intensity and high frequency treatment of sex, nudity, coarse language and adult themes; and

b. the individual scenes which comprise the program.

24. As noted above, the MA category, while comprising the strongest material that is permitted for broadcast on commercial free-to-air television (apart from that with violent content), cannot accommodate material that would be unsuitable for persons aged 15. It is therefore relevant in this instance to consider not whether the material is suitable for the adult audience to which it is said to be largely targeted, but whether it is suitable for persons aged 15, 16 and 17 years.

25. Previously2, ACMA has considered the fact that Big Brother Uncut specifically targets the younger end of the adult demographic, if anything, sharpens the focus on the selection of material for broadcast, to ensure the limits imposed by the MA classification are not exceeded. The need for responsible programming at this level has been argued by licensees themselves, in the context of negotiations in the development and reviews of the code. This is in recognition of the fact that free-to-air television is readily available in the home, with time zones and consumer advice providing the only regulated barriers to access.

2 ACMA Investigation Report Nos. 1557, 1558, 1559

Program components

26. Of a total of approximately 41 scenes in the episode, over half contain at least one of the classifiable elements, and many contain several including sexual references, verbal and visual depictions of adult themes, coarse language and/or full frontal or partial nudity. The remainder of the scenes in the episode contain cutaways to or lead-ins from the program host or graphics instructing viewers how to vote to eliminate housemates. Approximately 14 scenes contain sexual references or discussion between housemates regarding sexual behaviour and other adult themes, making up the majority of the classifiable elements within the program.

27. These scenes are often extended in nature, for example, a scene depicting male housemates defecating in the females’ toilet is over six minutes duration and a scene in which two male housemates explicitly discuss past sexual exploits is of over five minutes duration. Two other scenes (for example, a scene depicting male housemates discussing which of the female housemates they would have sex with and a scene in which female housemates discuss the use of a vibrator and one female impliedly masturbates) are over 3 minutes duration.

28. The combined duration of scenes containing sexual references, coarse language, adult themes or nudity is approximately 36 minutes of a total of approximately 50 minutes of program material not counting commercial breaks.

29. These scenes are briefly described below:

• Breast nudity as a female housemate dances around the bedroom topless;

• Female housemate discusses the exposure of her unwaxed crotch or ‘snatch’;

• Female housemate plucking her pubic hair, accompanied by discussion of having thrush and the resulting vaginal odours;

• Male housemate, while role-playing as a student in a classroom, describes a door knob as ‘being like a woman, everyone has had a turn’;

• Discussion and frequent close ups of a boil on a male housemates buttock;

• Description by a male housemate of his simultaneous participation, with six other males, in sexual activity such as intercourse and fellatio with one female;

• Breast nudity accompanied by the female housemate shaving her pubic hair and singing Advance Australia Fair;

• Coarse language, including frequent uses of ‘fuck’ language while discussing a male housemates flatulence;

• Discussion of and demonstration of ‘fanny farts’; • Discussion regarding which female housemate the male housemates would have sex with;

• Male housemate teasing a female housemate about wanting sex;

• Male housemate tells another housemate that a female housemate is arranging a threesome for him once out of the Big Brother house;

• Coarse language and adult themes as male housemates defecate into the female’s toilet, intentionally leaving faecal marks and matter in the toilet bowl, described as the ‘Kanga’;

• Female housemate describes her sexual exploits and alcohol consumption while attending ‘schoolies’ week, including describing performing unprotected oral sex. Another female housemate makes a reference to the risk of contracting Chlamydia;

• Male housemates straddle a female housemate who is doing a shoulder stand to demonstrate sexual positions.

• Two males in the sauna describe past sexual exploits in detail; • Male housemate describes having intercourse with a woman while the woman simultaneously performed oral sex on another woman;

• Female housemate describes inserting objects such as a banana and a deodorant can into her vagina;

• Female housemates discuss the use of a vibrator. Subsequently, a female housemate impliedly masturbates;

• Full frontal nudity of two male housemates shaking their flaccid penises in order to catch them between their thighs.

Complainants’ concerns

30. The complainants specifically raised concerns regarding ‘crude language’, nudity and, in particular, sexual conversations occurring between housemates. One complainant describes the program as being ‘loaded with detailed references to sexual behaviour’ and considers the program contains ‘frequent masturbation scenes, including the use of vibrators’ and ‘explicit conversations.’

31. One complainant also considered elements of the program dealt with ‘adult issues’ not suitable for persons aged 15 years, particularly the sexual elements in the program, described by the complainant as ‘pornographic’.

Ten’s submissions

32. In submissions dated 1 September 2005 and 28 November 2005 the licensee stated:

As with other episodes of Big Brother Uncut under investigation, this episode featured a range of mostly humorous footage of the housemates’ behaviour, relationships and conversations during the week.

…the [episode] features some discussion of sexual behaviour. These conversations typically show a group of housemates sitting together sharing information about their sexual experiences, preferences, and anxieties. The tone of the conversations is friendly, frank, non-sexual and humorous, limiting the intensity of the depiction.

The conversations are not titillating. On the contrary, the housemates show their awareness of the potential consequences of such sexual behaviour, such as the risk of contracting sexually transmitted disease during unprotected sexual intercourse. While some conversations are detailed, they are not explicit. Accordingly, the verbal references to sexual behaviour comply with the MA15+ classification.

33. In regard to the scene in which Christie describes having unprotected oral sex, the licensee stated:

The story contained only a brief description of sexual activity and little detail of a sexual nature. It contained only infrequent coarse language. The story was not titillating and did not glorify Christie’s behaviour. In fact, the focus of the story was the unpleasantness of Christie’s experience, and the potential danger of the situation. For example, the housemates discussed the risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases during unprotected sexual intercourse.

34. Following receipt of ACMA’s preliminary investigation report, Ten made an additional submission on 17 February 2006. In this submission, Ten indicated that it accepted ACMA’s preliminary breach finding, and requested additional information in order to ensure that future episodes of Big Brother Uncut complied with the Code. Ten’s submission stated:

In order to implement ACMA’s finding, Ten needs to clearly understand what this decision means. After reading the preliminary breach finding and discussing it internally, there are three issues that Ten would like to clarify with ACMA. These are:

• assessing the cumulative intensity of a program;

• recognising adult themes in an MA15+ program; and

• the role of context.

35. ACMA has addressed the individual components of Ten’s request in the report.

Issues
Sex and Nudity

36. The first relevant classification criterion is that for sex and nudity. Clause 5.2 (Sex and Nudity) concerns ‘visual depictions of intimate sexual behaviour’ and contains no provision relating to sexual references. The consistently high intensity and adult subject matter of the sexual references in the program means that, in this instance, it is appropriate to consider them within the scope of ‘adult themes’ and not under the MA criteria for ‘Sex and Nudity’.

37. The program does contain visual depictions of implied sexual behaviour (such as a scene depicting a female housemate impliedly masturbating and a scene in which two male housemates straddle a female housemate who is doing a shoulder stand to demonstrate sexual positions) and nudity (such as breast nudity and male full frontal nudity).

38. In considering whether the particular depictions of nudity in the episode meet or exceed the MA classification criteria, the context for, duration of, and degree of nudity are relevant.

39. The depictions of full frontal nudity in the episode occur in a somewhat naturalistic setting, such as when housemates use the communal shower. These depictions are generally depicted in long shot and genitals are not unduly highlighted.

40. Individual scenes depicting sexual behaviour are considered to be visually discreet, (for example, in the scene depicting a female housemate impliedly masturbating, any activity is entirely obscured under a sheet).

41. However, the impact of these individual scenes depicting sexual conduct and nudity, in the context of a high level of discussion about sexual matters, has the effect of heightening the overall intensity of the program material.

Adult Themes: Sexual references

42. ACMA has previously considered the treatment of sexual references at the MA level3 and notes that the Code does not give explicit guidance in regard to sexual references in MA classified material.

3 ACMA Investigation Report Nos. 1557, 1558, 1559

43. The lack of any specific mention of sexual references in the MA category does not mean that there are no limits on the strength of sexual references permitted at the MA classification level. Sexual references, in common with all material that can be accommodated within the MA classification, must remain suitable for persons aged 15 years, and must not contain subject matter of an intensity or frequency that would make it unsuitable for this age group.

44. While there is no specific provision at the MA level relating to sexual references, the fact that sexual references in this episode of the program are frequent, consistently intense and permeated by subject matter containing adult perspectives and experiences means that it is appropriate to consider them within the classification element of ‘adult themes.’

45. Discussions involving adult themes, particularly sexual matters, are pervasive throughout the episode of the program under investigation and contribute significantly to the episode’s overall intensity.

46. These discussions describe adult perspectives and experiences; that is, matters that would not be within the experience of the ordinary 15 year old audience member and are arguably unsuitable for them.

47. For example, discussions include a female housemate describing her sexual activity during ‘schoolies’ week, including engaging in unprotected oral sex, two men describing apparently casual sexual encounters in explicit detail and a male describing himself and six other men engaging in sexual activity with one female simultaneously.

48. Other discussions relate to sexual fantasies, sex with multiple partners, sex under the influence of alcohol, unprotected casual sexual activity, the possible transmission of sexually transmitted diseases and use of sex toys or objects as props during sexual activity.

49. The pervasive nature of the themes is such that they are an intrinsic component of the program and contribute to a consistently high intensity and strong cumulative impact.

50. Strong themes, such as those discussed at points 47 and 48 above, require an adult perspective and would be appropriate in an MA classified program only where justified by the story line or program context.

51. In their submission dated 1 September 2005 Network Ten argued that inclusion of certain material in the Big Brother Uncut series of programs is justified by the need to illustrate an aspect of a participant’s character. In this case, this argument is not sufficient to give cause or justification to the high intensity and high frequency treatment of strong adult themes in the program and there is no other context for this material that would give reason to justify it.

ACMA’s preliminary view

52. The strength of the adult themes, particularly the frequency and intensity of the adult subject matter of the sexual references in the program, combined with other classifiable elements such as implied sexual behaviour and full frontal or partial nudity, have a cumulative intensity beyond that which could be justified by the story line or program context and puts the episode beyond the level of suitability for the MA classification.

53. ACMA considers the pervasive nature of the adult themes means that the program as a whole fails to satisfy the overarching requirement at clause 5 that material be suitable for viewers aged 15 years.

Ten’s response to ACMA’s preliminary view

In its 17 February 2006 submission, Ten asked ACMA to clarify a number of matters in relation to the breach finding. ACMA has addressed these matters below.

Cumulative intensity

54. Ten has requested ACMA indicate factors that contribute to the cumulative intensity of a program. Specifically, Ten has asked ACMA if there is an objective test that can be applied. Ten has also asked ACMA to indicate how specific scenes in the program have contributed to the cumulative intensity. Ten has stated:

Ten’s understanding is that the intensity of a Big Brother Uncut episode is determined by factors like the purpose of the sequence, the tone (that is, whether scenes are humorous, playful, or aggressive, and whether the hosted segments alleviate the tension), the duration of scenes and whether a particular context is created.

For example, if an episode contains a number of extended scenes with strong classifiable elements, and if many scenes within the program are not contextualised, the episode’s cumulative impact will be high. Conversely, if the episode contains scenes with a genuinely humorous and playful tone the cumulative impact will be lower.

Ten also understands that an MA15+ program needs to be carefully modulated. That is, a scene with a high impact should be book-ended with scenes with a lower impact to lighten the tone of the episode. Additionally, the higher the impact of individual scenes, the more important it is that surrounding scenes have a lower impact.

55. While it is not possible to give an objective and definitive measure of cumulative intensity, as this will be a matter of judgement which must be applied on a case-by-case basis, ACMA concurs that the factors listed by Ten are amongst those that should be considered in making this judgement. Cumulative intensity is likely to be reduced by juxtaposing scenes of high impact with others with lower impact, including, for example, those that do not contain any classifiable elements, or contain elements that would be suitable at lower classification levels.

56. In terms of Ten’s request that ACMA identify specific scenes in this episode that have strong intensity, examples include a scene in which two males in a sauna recount past sexual exploits, discussions such as that in which a male describes sexual intercourse involving one female and seven males, a scene in which a female housemate describes sexual exploits and alcohol consumption during schoolies week, and scenes in which male housemates straddle the same female in order to demonstrate sexual positions.

57. However, ACMA reiterates that cumulative intensity is not derived from single scenes, but from the impact of the program components as a whole. In this case, elements contributing to the cumulative intensity of the program include the large proportion of broadcast material in the program, approximately 72%, containing at least one of the classifiable elements of adult themes and sexual references, nudity and coarse language. The treatment and frequency of these elements means that they are an intrinsic and pervasive part of the program as a whole.

58. In this particular episode of Big Brother Uncut there are limited contextualising components to decrease the intensity of the subject matter. The program components that do not contain high level classification elements do not serve to lower the impact of the program, rather they are also often confronting or potentially offensive in nature. For example, the ‘Kanga’ scene and the scene of the female plucking her pubic hair, referred to above, purport to portray humorous events in the household. However, these scenes also contain potentially degrading or confronting components, detracting from their ability to lower the overall intensity of the program.

Adult themes

59. Ten has requested ACMA clarify the meaning of ‘adult themes’ and how the strength of such themes may be assessed under the MA 15+ classification. Ten has asked for clarification of:

… whether the strong ‘adult themes’ referred to in the preliminary report were what Ten refers to as ‘sexual references’, or whether there were separate strong ‘adult themes’ that we had not identified when classifying the episode… To resolve any confusion about the meaning of adult themes, it would be extremely valuable if the term ‘adult themes’ was defined in the report and illustrated with examples from the episode.

60. ACMA has taken the view that ‘adult themes’ can relate to matters that may also fall under other classification elements, and that the classification elements are not necessarily mutually exclusive. In terms of the types of sexual references that contain adult themes, ACMA has noted above that such references are of an intensity and deal with such subject matter that they relate to adult perspectives, behaviours or experiences. Examples of such themes are listed at paragraphs 47 and 48 above.

61. In assessing the strength of adult themes, ACMA considers how the theme is treated and whether or not there are contextualising elements accompanying the theme which decrease the theme’s impact. In some circumstances, if the theme is treated in a humorous way it may have less impact than a serious treatment. However, this is not always the case, for example, where the accompanying humour may create an offensive, derogatory or degrading tone which would serve to heighten the intensity of a theme’s portrayal. Having a range of views expressed around a theme may also provide some context which may, in some cases, lessen the intensity of a theme.

Context

62. Ten has stated:

After reviewing the 4 July episode and considering the breach finding, Ten understands that the main problem was the lack of context for individual scenes. Had stronger scenes in particular been better contextualised, the show would not have exceeded MA15+.

…Ten understands that the preliminary report is stating that where scenes include strong depictions of classifiable elements, such as sexual references, the scene must have an appropriate context and purpose. For strong scenes the purpose must be something more than the general purpose of Big Brother Uncut, which is to reveal the housemates’ true characters so that viewers can make an informed decision about who should win the program’s substantial prize. Other legitimate purposes could include illuminating the relationship between the housemates and documenting the housemates’ attitudes to particular types of sexual activity.

63. ACMA is not convinced that the other ‘legitimate purposes’ identified by Ten would provide sufficient contextual justification for the material included in the program, as these purposes could already be cited in relation to the material at hand. Furthermore, if the scenes were presented within an overarching context or purpose other than that of an observational reality style program (if, for example, they were set in the context of a critical documentary on the sexual experiences of young Australians), this may or may not render individual scenes suitable for MA, or decrease the cumulative intensity and frequency of the classifiable elements to the extent necessary to make the program suitable for an MA classification.

ACMA’s Decision

The Australian Communications and Media Authority determines for the above reasons that the licensees, Network Ten (Brisbane) Pty Ltd and Network Ten (Perth) Pty Ltd, in relation to the broadcast of an episode of the Big Brother Uncut on 4 July 2006, breached clause 2.4 of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice. The Common Seal of the Australian Communications and Media Authority was affixed to this document in the presence of:
Signature of Chairman Signature of Member/General Manager
Name (please print)
Name (please print)
Dated this day of 2006

Action Taken

On 5 October 2005, Ten provided ACMA with a number of undertakings following previous Code breaches4 in relation to the 30 May 2005 and 13 June 2005 episodes of Big Brother Uncut program. For the 2006 series of the program, Ten has undertaken to:

• Ensure two classifiers, one of whom will be the senior Network classifier, independently assess each episode of Big Brother Uncut prior to broadcast;

• Amend production processes for Big Brother Uncut to allow time for classifiers to view the program, and to make time and production resources available for recompilation of the program, if necessary, for classification purposes;

• Conduct a two-day education program for the production crew, prior to the start of the 2006 series of the program, with a focus on ACMA’s breach findings and the requirements of the MA15+ classification;

• Develop detailed internal classification guidelines for the production crew and circulate ACMA’s investigation report along with an explanation of ACMA’s decision to production staff and management at Ten and Endemol Southern Star; and

• For the duration of the 2006 series of Big Brother Uncut, provide a weekly report to ACMA on any Code related complaints regarding the program and Ten’s response to such complaints.

In addition to these undertakings, and in relation to this particular investigation, Ten indicated in its 17 February 2006 submission that it accepts ACMA’s breach finding in relation to this episode, and intends to take action to implement the finding. Ten has indicated it intends to develop production guidelines for use by the production crew on set, based on ACMA’s report. Ten has indicated that the guidelines will:

…summarise the finding, give instructions about how to edit footage so that it complies with the Code, and provide examples of footage that can and cannot be included.

Ten has also indicated that two Network classifiers will provide ongoing advice to the production crew in regard to this finding, in order to ensure compliance with the Code.

ACMA considers Ten’s proposed action and the undertakings previously provided by Ten address factors which contributed to the code breach found by ACMA in this investigation. ACMA has previously indicated that it will closely monitor future series of the program to ensure Code compliance is met.

4 ACMA Investigation Report Nos. 1557, 1558, 1559

***

Paul Neville
National Party
Media Release
Neville Applauds ACMA Findings On Big Brother Uncut
Thursday, 6 October 2005

Paul Neville’s stand on Big Brother Uncut has led to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) disciplining Channel 10 for breaching the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice in three episodes of the program.

One of Mr Neville’s suggestions – that Big Brother Uncut be subject to viewing and pre-classification prior to broadcast – was adopted by the ACMA in its rulings.

“I am not a zealot about censorship, but when an industry is allowed to regulate itself through a code of practice it has an obligation to maintain those standards,” Mr Neville said.

Mr Neville raised the matter in the Joint Party Room earlier this year, spoke on the issue in Parliament and spoke with ACMA official in Canberra.

He described some episodes of the program as demeaning and a poor excuse to show gratuitous sexual activity.

“Quite apart from this, it was mind-numbing banality and lowered the standards of Australia free to air television.”

“A number of episodes were clearly beyond the MA 15+ classification and ACMA found that to be the case in at least three instances.”

“It is insulting to Australian viewers to suggest that a semi-circle of double beds containing nubile girls and active young men in a group situation as being reflective of community standards. It is simply nonsense.”

“I was also troubled to hear of the number of young people openly discussing this program.”

“When people rent videos, go to the movies or buy an X-rated product from the ACT, they do so with the clear knowledge of what they are buying and what they are getting.”

“Free to air television is a different medium - the public has a right to expect that licensed television stations will aspire to high standards and maintain the Code of Practice.”

Continue...

Big Brother (2005)

http://www.refused-classification.com

refusedclassification@gmail.com