Kitchen Nightmares
2007 / USA
Gordon Ramsay's bad language in KITCHEN NIGHTMARES was the subject of a speech by South Australian Senator Cory Bernardi in March 2008.
***
Liberal Cory Bernardi's speech to the Senate
ADJOURNMENT: Obscene Language on Television
Date 18 March, 2008
Database Senate Hansard
Speaker Bernardi, Sen Cory (LP, South Australia, Opposition)
Interjector Mason, Sen Brett
Page 86
Proof Yes
Source Senate
Type Speech
Context Adjournment
ADJOURNMENT Obscene Language on Television
Speech Senator BERNARDI (South Australia) (9.54 p.m.)—I begin my address this evening by stating for the record that I am not a wowser. I have a broad acceptance of the Australian vernacular and the colourful use of language that permeates many aspects of Australian life. But like many Australians—most Australians, I would say—I do not agree with the gratuitous use of obscene language in our society, particularly in the public discourse or the broadcasts through our public media.
Just what is obscene language, of course, may be up for some debate, and I will not debate the wider issue now. But, if we draw ourselves back to 1912, when George Bernard Shaw’s play Pygmalion entered the stage it caused an outrage by using the term ‘not bloody likely’. Now I use that term in this place with full respect for this place because it no longer causes a great deal of offence. In fact, a similar phrase was used in an advertising campaign promoting Australian tourism. It did not cause offence so much, but it did spark a great deal of debate across the world.
You can imagine my surprise when, reviewing the contribution of bad language to Australian television history, I noticed that what outraged audiences when Graham Kennedy made his infamous crow call, and what saw British television ban the band the Sex Pistols in 1976 for using the c-word, is now readily available and quite apparent on the 9.30 timeslot in shows such as Gordon Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares. I quite like Gordon Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares. I know there is a warning immediately before it that we are going to be exposed to some bad language. But there is a level at which we have to say, ‘Enough is enough.’ That level was reached, I believe, when Mr Ramsay used the c-word—as I will politely describe it—a couple of times in an episode broadcast at 9.30 at night. Mr Ramsay is very popular, of course. The following week he was in the 8.30 timeslot, in an episode which featured the use of the f-word 80 times, apparently, in a 40-minute time period. To me that is a bit outrageous. I think it is unnecessary. I do not think it supports the tone or the content of the program itself. But, more importantly, I think it undermines a great deal of the integrity associated with the Australian broadcasting networks.
The Australian broadcasting networks have a code of conduct. The code of conduct is quite straightforward: it is about broadcasting material that is relevant to the program and that is not likely to cause serious offence. There are warnings regarding frequent very coarse language—language that is aggressive or can be interpreted in an aggressive manner. We have seen this sort of language used not only in Gordon Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares but in Sex and the City, The Sopranos and Big Brother Uncut. All of them have aroused some comment in the public domain.
But my comment is related to the actual process of complaining about such use of language where one thinks it is gratuitous or unnecessary and actually damages what I think is the social structure of Australian life. As I said at the start, I am not a wowser. I accept that bad language is going to be used. I understand that people—individuals and parents—have a responsibility to determine their own viewing habits by turning programs they find offensive off. But there are circumstances where, as I said, we have to say, ‘Enough is enough.’
The process, I have discovered, is that when you think language is inappropriate for broadcasting in a particular timeslot there are a number of avenues, but basically you have to write initially to the television station to complain within 30 days of it being broadcast. The television station is required to give you a response within 60 days. If you are not satisfied with the response given by the television station, you can then approach ACMA. ACMA is the body that is responsible for the standards on television outside the self-policing done by the television stations themselves. After one has written to ACMA, within 60 days, if the complaint is determined to be one that ACMA will handle then they will consider the information provided and offer the offending station the opportunity to reply. Comments from stations in this opportunity to reply can take up to three months, and in some cases a bit longer. Once ACMA has all of the information, the complaint is assessed against the code of conduct. It is not uncommon, I am advised, not to receive any advice or a report from ACMA until five or six months after the complaint has been initially lodged—and this does not include the time from the original broadcast.
I believe this dissuades a lot of people from making complaints or identifying areas of our public broadcasting system where they have particular problems. I also believe that there is an opportunity for us in government to review the process to give ordinary Australians more of a say and more of an impact on what is acceptable for viewing on our public broadcasting system. Imagine for a moment—it is now 10 o’clock in the Senate and there are possibly two or three people listening to this broadcast outside of this house—
Interjection Senator Mason—There are thousands!
Continue Senator BERNARDI—There may well be thousands, but I suspect it is somewhat less than that. Imagine if I littered this speech with a bunch of profanities. In 10 minutes, if I wanted to adhere to Mr Ramsay’s record, I guess I could get 20 or so Fs in and maybe a couple of Cs. Imagine the outrage that would be heard around Australia if a member of our parliamentary team used that language in a chamber like this. It would be appalling. It would be outrageous. Why should we expect anything less from our public broadcasters? I use the term ‘public’ in the sense that they are free-to-air broadcasters. They have carriage across a great percentage of our population. We need to determine whether they are going to be a licence unto themselves in what they broadcast.
I understand perfectly that there are live feeds that may result in inopportune or unfortunate language or comments being broadcast but there is no excuse for gratuitous bad language to be broadcast repeatedly if it has no real bearing on the material being shown, in a relatively early time slot, and when it can clearly be beeped out or censored. I say this not because I believe in censorship but because I believe strongly that what we broadcast on our televisions has a profound impact on how we conduct ourselves, over the course of time.
I go back to the examples of the Sex Pistols, who were banned from British TV and Graham Kennedy who was banned from television, for much lesser offences 30-odd years ago. What is the next step? If we accept that the c-word is perhaps the most offensive within the English language, and that it is now okay to broadcast it after 9.30 at night, the next step is to be able to broadcast it more frequently, and at earlier and earlier time slots. This is what concerns me. We have seen the incremental creep of bad language into our society. We have seen a change in what is acceptable in our discourse with our colleagues and sometimes with our families and our friends. I take the stand that this is unacceptable in the public domain and I believe that we should streamline the process so that ACMA has a more efficient means of dealing with complaints to ensure that the broadcast standards are maintained.
***
Liberal Bruce Billson's speech to the House
ADJOURNMENT: Free-to-Air Television
Date 18 March, 2008
Database House Hansard
Speaker Billson, Bruce, MP (Dunkley, LP, Opposition)
Interjector SPEAKER, The
Page 63
Proof Yes
Source House
Type Speech
Context Adjournment
Main Committee No
ADJOURNMENT Free-to-Air Television
Speech Mr BILLSON (Dunkley) (8.58 p.m.)—I rise to convey some concerns that my friends and parliamentary colleagues the member for Cowan, Luke Simpkins, and South Australian Senator Cory Bernardi have raised with me. In essence, their concerns relate to representations they have received about the proper classification of some of the content on our free-to-air television networks. Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares is one example, where very strident and frequent coarse language has raised concerns. Also, the Channel 9 series Underbelly has received some attention about of its content. I think what is fairly categorised as adult drama may often not be properly reflected in the classification and therefore the timing of that show going to air on television. Interestingly, Channel 9 has properly recognised that in some episodes there is frequent very coarse language. That is an advice that is provided to the viewer, but that insight is not reflected in the actual classification given to the show. If we are to continue to have a self-regulatory system, we need confidence in the way these judgements are made. I encourage the networks involved to carefully look at the issues that have been raised with them and to respond appropriately.
Interjection The SPEAKER—Order! It being 9.00 pm, the debate is interrupted.
***
C7 and C9's censors on the controversy
Ramsay says f*** 80 times in TV show Herald Sun 17.03.08
Richard Lyle, chief classification officer for Nine, said the commercial TV Code of Practice stated the use of coarse language must "be appropriate to the story line or program context, infrequent and not be very aggressive".
The code states that swearing "may be used more than infrequently only in certain justifiable circumstances, when it is particularly important to the story line or program context".
Mr Lyle said Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares fited that criteria.
"Gordon Ramsay often does not use (the F-word) as swearing necessarily, just as another word, and sometimes even as praise," Mr Lyle said.
"The tension in kitchens just brings out the worst language.
"In another M-rated show, it could be bleeped out. So much depends on the context."
In the same timeslot as Kitchen Nightmares - which was the number one program of the night -Channel 7 showed M-rated talk show Out of the Question and animated series Family Guy.
Liz Alexander, classification officer for Seven, said M-rated programs were shown at times when research had shown the main audiences were over 15.
Ms Alexander said the standards had room for changes in what society found acceptable.
***
C9's censors on the controversy
Turning the box blue The Age 08.05.08
..... as Nine's chief classification officer Richard Lyle points out: "(Coarse language) may be used more than infrequently in certain justifiable circumstances only when it is particularly important to the storyline or program context. And so my interpretation of that, in this instance, for most of Gordon's language, that is exactly how I would defend it. And 1.6 million Australians seem to think that they would rather hear him unedited than beeped."
The beep-heavy US cut, which was the first viewed by Nine, sounded "like a truck in reverse," says Lyle.
So why is it that Australians will accept a show riddled with swear words when less than a decade ago the mention of the c-word (in its biological context) on Sex and the City in an adults-only timeslot (after 9.30pm) caused a scandal? When a newspaper article about the very subject must replace the offending letters with dashes? When we would never stand for a 9pm news bulletin that began, "Police have caught the f---er who shot that woman"?
Lyle believes Ramsay gets away with it because of his persona.
"Ramsay uses f--- as an amplifier. He says: 'This restaurant could be f---ing great if you could just use it f---ing properly because it's got a f---ing great view.' When we talk about using aggressive coarse language, we mean somebody saying: 'Listen to me, you hopeless little dogshit, I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire and I'm going to kick your arse'. You get that in a lot of M-rated movies. Most of the time, Gordon is very enthusiastic about everything."
A recent 60 Minutes interview with Ramsay called into question the issue of swearing in a 7.30pm timeslot.
"If you're discussing the language, it's all right," Lyle explains. "You have an exception at 7.30pm because you're a news and current-affairs show; you're giving warnings beforehand. But that sort of thing's rare. Normally at 7.30pm no f--- language is allowed whatsoever. However, should there have been a protest during the torch relay and a plane flew by and wrote 'F--- China' in the sky, they'd have been entitled to have shown that if it had been covered as a news event. But saying it would have been an entirely different matter."
***
Senate 'Inquiry into the effectiveness of the broadcasting codes of practice'
Following Gordon Ramsay's use of bad language in Channel Nine's KITCHEN NIGHTMARES, the Liberals Cory Bernardi sought to have a senate inquiry into broadcasting standards.
The senate 'Inquiry into the effectiveness of the broadcasting codes of practice' released its final report in June 2008. Its recommendations were as follows.
Standing Committee on Environment, Communications
and the Arts
The effectiveness of the broadcasting codes of practice
June 2008
Committee membership
Members
Senator Anne McEwen (ALP, SA) (Chair)
Senator Andrew Bartlett (AD, QLD) (Deputy Chair)
Senator Simon Birmingham (LP, SA)
Senator the Hon. Rod Kemp (LP, VIC)
Senator Kate Lundy (ALP, ACT)
Senator Stephen Parry (LP, TAS)
Senator Ruth Webber (ALP, WA)
Senator Dana Wortley (ALP, SA)
Participating Members participating in this inquiry Senator Cory Bernardi (LP, SA)
Recommendations
Recommendation 1
The Committee recommends that, no later than the end of 2010, the government
considers a review of ACMA, with a focus on ACMA's role in the broadcasting
co-regulatory system, to determine if ACMA is effectively working with relevant
industry bodies to maintain a fair balance in Australia's broadcast media.
Recommendation 2
The Committee recommends that the provision of parental lock-out become an
industry standard for digital televisions sold in Australia. The Committee also
recommends that the feasibility of using datacasting to provide a more detailed
description of program content and the reasons for a program's rating which
could be accessed by the viewer.
Recommendation 3
The Committee recommends that ACMA investigate whether the inclusion of
additional age-specific symbols in the G and PG categories offer any advantages
over the current system.
Recommendation 4
Each industry code of practice should clarify terms used for classification and
consumer advice as much as is practicable (eg. 'occasional', 'some' and
'frequent'). Codes should also contain a clear discussion on the principles for
classification, such as 'impact', that may be used to determine a program's
classification.
Recommendation 5
The Committee recommends that ACMA and Free TV Australia investigate, as part of
the current review of the Commercial Television Code of Practice, the issue of
the appropriateness of the current evening time zones having regard to claims of
changed patterns of television usage by children.
Recommendation 6
The Committee does not wish to tell television stations what they should or
should not include in news and current affairs programming. However it
recommends that ACMA, in consultation with broadcasters, review the sections of
the Classification Code applying to news and current affairs programming, with
regard to the use of graphic and disturbing imagery and excerpts from M or
higher rated programs in news and current affairs broadcasting in early evening
time zones.
Recommendation 7
Free-to-air television stations should show the classification watermark
throughout program promotion to increase viewer awareness of the classification
of the program being promoted.
Recommendation 8
The Committee recommends that television broadcasters should give consideration
to permanently displaying the classification symbol of a program on screen along
with the letters indicating which classifiable elements are present in the
program. The Committee believes that there is scope for broadcasters to place
this information next to watermarks, which are now displayed by all free-to-air
stations.
Recommendation 9
The electronic programming guide on digital free-to-air television stations
should contain the classification of the program being viewed and the consumer
advice relevant to the program.
Recommendation 10
The Committee recommends that ACMA, in consultation with industry bodies for
radio, considers implementing the use of verbal warnings in their next codes of
practice.
Recommendation 11
The Committee recommends that all free-to-air commercial television stations
should maintain a log of all telephone complaints received, including a short
summary of the complaint, and provide that log to Free TV Australia and ACMA.
Recommendation 12
All broadcasters should amend their codes of practice and website capabilities
to allow viewers to make complaints about the code by email or electronically.
Email and electronic complaints about code-related issues should receive the
same response as a written complaint.
Recommendation 13
Similarly worded complaints received by email, electronically or in writing may
receive a standard written response from the broadcaster following notification
to, and approval by, ACMA.
Recommendation 14
Codes of practice should contain a formal undertaking by broadcasters that they
will direct complainants as appropriate. Industry bodies and ACMA should ensure
that their staff are aware of how to re-direct complaints received in error and
inform complainants where this occurs.
Recommendation 15
The Committee recommends that, by the time of the next triennial review of
free-to-air television codes of practice, broadcasters should seek to respond to
all complaints received within 15 working days.
Recommendation 16
Each broadcaster should have a nominated complaints officer within the
organisation whose sole role it is to respond to complaints. The officer should
be separate from the program production and scheduling sections and from the
area responsible for classifying or rating programs. Officers should receive
relevant training in the appropriate code of conduct and complaint management.
The contact details of the complaints officer should be published on the website
of the broadcaster, industry body and ACMA.
Recommendation 17
Broadcasters should ensure that responses to complaints are comprehensive, deal
with the substantive issue and are courteous in tone.
Recommendation 18
ACMA should develop a practice of testing compliance with standards and codes of
practice by conducting investigations into a sample of programs that may, in its
opinion, raise issues with regard to the appropriateness of the classification
received.
Recommendation 19
In the event that SBS or the ABC fails to comply with an ACMA recommendation
within a 14 days period of receiving such a recommendation, ACMA should
automatically provide a report to the Minister on the matter.
******
Swearing is an acquired taste, but not from Chef Pottymouth SMH 20.03.08
The committee said pottymouths on TV were more likely to reinforce known habits, rather than cultivate new ones.
Despite this, David Gyngell, the chief executive of Nine Network which broadcasts the offending program, promised the committee that the word 'c----' would not be used by the station any more.
This move exceeded the requirements of the code of practice for free-to-air stations.
******
ACMA "Kitchen Nightmares" The Secret Garden exceeded M-rating
In August 2008 the Australian Communications and Media Authority found that KITCHEN NIGHTMARES: THE SECRET GARDEN should have been classified MA15+ due to coarse language.
See Investigation Report #2021
Australian Government
Australian Communications and Media Authority
ACMA media release 107/2008
28 August 28 August 2008
ACMA finds that coarse language in Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares exceeded M classification guidelines
The Australian Communications and Media Authority has found that Channel Nine South Australia Pty Ltd breached the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice on 6 March 2008, by broadcasting Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares – Secret Garden with an incorrect M (Mature) classification. The finding arose out of a complaint about coarse language in the program.
ACMA found that the program contained both aggressive coarse language and very coarse language, neither of which is permitted in M-classified programs. While the code allows frequent coarse language in M-classified programs (where it is particularly important to the storyline or program context) ACMA determined it was not justified in this case.
ACMA concluded that the program should have been classified MA (Mature Audience). Programs which are classified MA are considered suitable for viewing only by persons aged 15 years or over in view of the intensity and/or frequency of coarse language or other material contained in the program. Such programs must be broadcast in the later MA time zone.
‘The code establishes a scale for the level and amount of coarse language that is permissible in programs at each classification level, and requires programs that contain more impactful coarse language to be classified appropriately,’ said Chris Chapman, ACMA Chairman.
‘In this instance, while classified M, the program was actually aired in the later MA classification time zone, where more impactful coarse language is permitted. Nevertheless, licensees are required to correctly classify programs to ensure that viewers are aware of the level of material they are likely to encounter in a program, and that the program is promoted at appropriate times.’
The licensee is an affiliate of the Nine Network. Both the licensee and the Nine Network conceded that the program contained very coarse language that is not permissible in M-classified programs, and have confirmed that the very coarse language contained in the program will not be broadcast in any future programs.
More generally, ACMA is investigating a number of complaints about broadcasts of other Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares programs by the licensee and other Nine Network affiliates. ACMA intends to consider appropriate remedial action, taking into account all relevant findings and action taken by the licensees, once all of these investigations have been completed.
Investigation report 2021 is available on the ACMA website.
******
ACMA "Kitchen Nightmares" Rococo and Sebastian's exceeded M-rating
In October 2008 the Australian Communications and Media Authority found that two further episodes of KITCHEN NIGHTMARES, ROCOCO and SEBASTIAN'S should have been classified MA15+ due to coarse language.
See Investigation Report #2022 ROCOCO
See Investigation Report #2039 SEBASTIAN'S
Australian Government
Australian Communications and Media Authority
ACMA media release 122/2008
14 October 2008
Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares and Underbelly programs were incorrectly classified M
The Australian Communications and Media Authority will require the Nine Network and affiliate licensees to ensure programs are correctly classified after finding that three Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares programs and three Underbelly programs were incorrectly classified M (Mature), rather than the more restrictive MA (Mature Audience) classification.
‘ACMA is particularly concerned about the number of programs that were incorrectly classified, and is discussing serious remedial action with the Nine Network, which provided and classified the programs, and with the WIN Television licensees, which broadcast the programs,’ said Chris Chapman, ACMA Chairman.
After investigating unresolved complaints about broadcasts by NWS Adelaide, VTV Regional Victoria and STW Perth, ACMA found that the licensees of all three services (Channel Nine South Australia, WIN Television Victoria and Swan Television and Radio Broadcasters), breached the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice (the code), due to coarse language or depictions of sex contained in the programs. All three licensees are part of the WIN Corporation and are affiliates of the Nine Network.
ACMA found that three Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares programs contained multiple instances of coarse language and that in each case such usage constituted frequent coarse language, which was not particularly important to the programs’ story lines. It also found that the Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares – Secret Garden program contained both very coarse language and very aggressive coarse language.
The three Underbelly programs contained depictions of implied or simulated sexual behaviour that were not restrained, because of their duration and the amount of detail they contained. One Underbelly program also contained very aggressive coarse language.
ACMA therefore concluded that all the programs should have been broadcast in the later MA time zone.
ACMA’s options for responding to the breaches of the code include imposing additional conditions on the licences that would require programs to be correctly classified.
‘ACMA recognises the circumstance faced by network affiliates who receive programming under program supply agreements, and it will take this circumstance into account when deciding what action it will take in relation to the WIN Corporation licensees (Nine Network affiliates) who have breached the code,’ said Mr Chapman.
Mr Chapman said the code specified limits on the types of material that could be contained in M-classified programs. ‘The code allows coarse language in M-classified programs but does not allow very aggressive coarse language or very coarse language. Frequent coarse language is allowed only when it is ‘particularly important to the story line or program context’. Equally, depictions of implied or simulated intimate sexual behaviour must be restrained in M-classified programs.’
The Authority indicated in its three investigation reports into Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares that there were several propositions in the Nine Network’s submission to ACMA that were simply unsustainable in terms of ACMA’s role in upholding community standards — especially the proposition that if a small percentage of coarse language is used in a program, relative to a program’s total spoken language, it is therefore ‘infrequent’ for the purposes of the code.
For example, in the case of Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares – Rococo, the Nine Network noted that there were 7,603 spoken words, leading to the observation that the use of 73 instances of coarse language accounted for less than one per cent of all language in the program.
Investigation reports 2018, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2039 and 2040 – dealing with these six separate breach matters – are available on the ACMA website.
***
ACMA "Kitchen Nightmares" Dillons and Ruby Tates exceeded M-rating
In November 2008 the Australian Communications and Media Authority found that two further episodes of KITCHEN NIGHTMARES, DILLONS and RUBY TATES should have been classified MA15+ due to coarse language.
See Investigation Report #2070 DILLONS
See Investigation Report #2071 RUBY TATES
Australian Government
Australian Communications and Media Authority
media release 148/2008
24th November 2008
Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares were incorrectly classified M
The Australian Communications and Media Authority will require the Nine Network and affiliate licensees to ensure programs are correctly classified after finding that two Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares programs were incorrectly classified M (Mature), rather than the more restrictive MA (Mature Audience) classification.
After investigating unresolved complaints about broadcasts by QTQ Nine Queensland, ACMA found that the licensee of the service (Queensland Television Ltd), a Nine Network station, breached the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice (the code), due to coarse language contained in the programs.
ACMA found that two Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares programs (Kitchen Nightmares – Ruby Tates and Kitchen Nightmares – Dillons) contained multiple instances of coarse language and that in each case such usage constituted frequent coarse language, which was not particularly important to the programs’ story lines.
ACMA therefore concluded that both programs should have been classified MA and broadcast in the later MA time zone.
QTQ has accepted the breach findings and will classify such programs as MA under the code in future.
‘Following recent breach findings related to the broadcast of other Kitchen Nightmares programs by Nine Network affiliates, ACMA has met with the Nine Network to discuss remedial action aimed at ensuring that these programs are correctly classified, taking particular account of the level of coarse language they contain,’ said Lyn Maddock, Acting ACMA Chair. ‘ACMA expects to finalise these discussions in time to ensure that future broadcasts of the series comply with the code.’
ACMA’s options for responding to the breaches of the code include imposing additional conditions on the licences that would require programs to be correctly classified.
Investigation reports 2070 and 2071 – dealing with these two separate breach matters – are available on the ACMA website.
