Justin Pearce
Adult television viewers must decide for themselves=20 what they watch and don’t watch — and cannot expect=20 the SABC to censor itself to suit their tastes. This is=20 the essence of a judgment made by the Broadcasting=20 Complaints Commission (BCC) of South Africa concerning=20 an insert broadcast on NNTV’s youth magazine programme=20 The Works during May.
The SABC and the producers of The Works appeared before=20 the BCC two weeks ago week after members of the public=20 complained about the insert, entitled “Sex in the=20 Nineties”. The insert was aimed at promoting safe sex,=20 and looked at sexual practices including homosexuality,=20 sadomasochism, and fetishism.
One of the complainants, Johannesburg attorney Eugene=20 Sklar, argued that, “I pay my television licence and am=20 as entitled as anybody else to watch television and=20 have as much right not to watch nudity and pornography=20 of any nature on television as any other citizen has to=20 watch such material on television.”
The Works executive producer Kathy Berman defended the=20 programme on the grounds that a frank attitude towards=20 sexuality was necessary if education on the prevention=20 of HIV infection was to be effective.
The BCC made its judgment on the principle –=20 established by the Publications Control Board as long=20 ago as 1965 — that no subject matter was inherently=20 undesirable, and that the real question concerns the=20 manner in which the subject is treated. The BCC=20 concluded that the complainants had no basis for=20 objecting to the coverage of sexual practices which=20 they did not approve of, and that in this instance the=20 way in which these practices were represented was in no=20 sense pornographic.
The judgment also invokes Section 15 of the=20 Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression,=20 and concludes that there are no sufficient grounds for=20 invoking Section 33, the “limitation clause”, which=20 allows for other constitutional provisions to be=20 suspended if this is demonstrably in the public good.
‘One of the consequences of democracy and an open=20 society is that one cannot live totally insulated from=20 reality,” the judgment reads. “The ordinary hurly-burly=20 of everyday life with its embarrassments, shocks and=20 disappointments cannot be evaded totally. All that a=20 public broadcaster could do is to give a reasonable=20 warning to viewers of sensitivities which a programme=20 could affect.”
The BCC did, however, uphold the objection that the=20 show was unsuitable for children and that it was=20 difficult for parents to keep children away from the=20 television during prime viewing time. The commission=20 reprimanded the SABC for broadcasting the insert in The=20 Works’ former 7.30pm slot, but had no objection to the=20 content of the show itself. The Works has in the=20 meantime moved to a later time slot.