Anne McEwen (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I present the report of the Environment, Communications and the Arts Committee entitled The effectiveness of the broadcasting codes of practice, together with the Hansard record of proceedings and documents presented to the committee.

Ordered that the report be printed.

by leave—I move:

That the Senate take note of the report.

The official title of this report is The effectiveness of the broadcasting codes of practice, although it has been more popularly known as the ‘Swearing on TV report’. The inquiry by the Senate Standing Committee on Environment, Communications and the Arts, which resulted in this report, came into being after some controversy following the airing of an episode of Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares, a very popular television show, which was probably made even more popular by the media attention given to this inquiry. That episode of the program featured very liberal use of unparliamentary language that I am unable to repeat here, but Senator Bernardi made reference to it in a speech that he gave about the same program. When the inquiry was agreed to by the Senate, there were those in the community who saw it as a good opportunity to get the government to prevent the broadcasting of material that some in the community find offensive and there were others who were worried that the inquiry would do just that. However, fortunately most of the 85 submissions to the inquiry that we received from individuals and organisations were very measured and thoughtful, and I believe that the report, which has been unanimously endorsed by the committee members, reflects those measured views put to the committee on this topic.

There is no doubt, as we found during the inquiry, that people are offended by some material on television and radio and by what appears to be the increasing use of coarse language or swearing during television programs in particular. Submissions did point out that often the community is equally offended by violence and explicit sexual material on television. Some people made the observation that what was really most offensive about the aforementioned episode of Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares was not simply the use of coarse language but the way it was used. People were offended by the way Ramsay directed his language to his restaurant staff in an abusive and aggressive manner, and a number of people made the point that that was probably more offensive than the actual words used.

The committee did not approach this inquiry by attempting to define community standards in respect of swearing or indeed sex or violence on television or radio. That is not the job of a Senate committee; it is the job of the broadcasters and ACMA, which together determine broadcasting codes of practice, and the various bodies which classify film and other material broadcast on television and radio.

The committee’s terms of reference were to look at the effectiveness of Australia’s broadcasting codes of practice, with particular reference to:

a.

the frequency and use of coarse and foul language … in programs;

b.

the effectiveness of the current classification standards as an accurate reflection of the content contained in the program;

c.

the operation and effectiveness of the complaints process currently available to members of the public; and

d.

any other related matters.

It was apparent from this inquiry, as it is apparent from ACMA research, that most Australians accept the contentions in the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, which states:

(a)

adults should be able to read, hear and see what they want;

(b)

minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them;

(c)

everyone should be protected from exposure to unsolicited material that they find offensive;

Most adults understand that what they find acceptable to watch or hear or read may cause great offence to others in the community. It is also clear that some people will never be happy with the systems in place to regulate what is broadcast. It will be either too restrictive for some or too lenient for others. The committee was very mindful of the need for a balance in this regard.

It was also apparent from this inquiry that adults, parents in particular, want to have confidence in the system of classification and broadcasting codes of practice that alert them and their children to the fact that material to be broadcast may contain elements that they may find offensive or unsuitable or it may contain material that they just do not want to see. Before they start watching a program on television or listening to a radio broadcast, people want to know broadly what it will contain and they want the probable content to be as clearly explained as possible so that they can make a judgement about whether or not to watch or listen. They do not want to be unpleasantly surprised by material they did not expect to see or hear. They want to be able to let their children watch television without having to worry that, during the times their children are watching programs, inappropriate material might be broadcast.

If broadcasters have not properly applied the rules for what is broadcast and when, then people want to be able to make a complaint about it and they want that complaint to be dealt with fairly and in a timely fashion. They also want broadcasters who continue to fail to observe the broadcasting codes to be penalised for doing so. The committee did not think those expectations were too much to ask of our broadcasters and of the regulatory systems that determine what is broadcast on radio and television and at what time. The 20 recommendations in this report go to very practical measures that the committee believes are workable, address the major issues identified in the inquiry and maintain the balance between the need for regulation and the freedom for people to choose what they see and hear.

A number of recommendations, particularly Nos 2, 3 and 5, have been made with the intention of assisting parents to determine what their children can watch. The recommendations include that the provision of a parental lock-out should become an industry standard for digital televisions sold in Australia, that ACMA investigate whether the inclusion of age-specific symbols in the G and PG categories offers any advantages over the current system, and that ACMA and Free TV Australia, which represents television broadcasters, investigate as part of the current review of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice the issue of the appropriateness of the current evening time zones with regard to claims made during the inquiry that family viewing patterns have changed as a result of parental work responsibilities and children at after school care and in care during holidays. There is some evidence that children are up and watching television a bit later than they used to.

The committee understands completely that people who have been offended by broadcasters who do not observe the broadcasting codes of practice want to be able to make a complaint and they want to be able to do that in a way that is easy to use and effective. Chapter 5 of the report examines that issue in some detail and contains recommendations specifically regarding the operation and effectiveness of complaints processes. Recommendation 12 says broadly that broadcasters should amend their codes of practice and website capabilities so that viewers can make complaints electronically by email or over the web and that those complaints will be dealt with in the same fashion as the current system of written complaints. That modernises the complaints process and makes it easier for a large proportion of Australians who do a majority of their communication these days through the internet, as we know.

A number of submissions conveyed frustration in that people believed that ACMA is ineffective in enforcing the codes of practice. More than 10 per cent of the submissions advocated for ACMA to use immediate financial penalties against broadcasters who are found to have breached the broadcasting codes of practice. In the committee report we have made a recommendation along the lines that ACMA should consider limiting its use of unenforceable undertakings in relation to breaches of the code, and that broadcasters who continue to breach the codes have the full range of what is available to ACMA applied to them, including financial penalties. The committee has also recommended that the government review the operation of ACMA before the end of 2010, by which time the organisation will have been in operation for five years. This will be a timely stage in its existence to see whether it is working effectively. On behalf of the committee I would like to thank the secretariat for their assistance and to thank all the organisations and persons who made submissions to this inquiry.