The Watershed
The television Watershed, which starts at 9.00 pm and lasts until 5.30 am, is well established as a scheduling marker to distinguish clearly between programmes intended mainly for
family viewing and those intended for adults. Some 90% of adults are aware of the Watershed and its significance. The Watershed should not be an abrupt change from family viewing to adult programming. It is not a waterfall, but a signal to parents that
they need to exercise increasing control over their children's viewing after this time. Parents should also be aware that even programming leading up to the Watershed might not be suitable for all children. The child audience covers a wide age range from
very young children to adolescents, and even some 'children's' programmes or news programmes may be unsuitable for younger child audiences. Broadcasters should provide sufficient information to assist parents and others to take the degree of
responsibility they feel appropriate for the children in their care.
Broadcasters should further bear in mind that children tend to stay up later than usual on Friday and Saturday nights and during school holidays and that programmes which start
before 9.00 pm and run through the Watershed may continue to be viewed by a family audience. Care should also be taken in the scheduling of daytime programmes in and out of term-time.
Cable and licensed satellite services operate with the standard
9.00 pm Watershed for all channels, except for specially encrypted services with restricted availability to children, which have two Watersheds: one at 8.00 pm (equivalent to the 9.00 pm change on other channels) and the second at 10.00 pm when material
of a more adult nature can be shown. Other cable and licensed satellite services are expected to follow similar standards to the terrestrial channels. The programmes and the versions of the films they broadcast should be suitable for the time of day. Pay Per View services give subscribers greater choice over what is available to view in the home. Given their stricter security systems, the Watershed does not apply in the same way. However, the expectation is that the films or programmes shown will conform to the same basic principles set out in this Code.
Although there is no Watershed for radio, caution should be exercised at the times children tend to listen, especially during breakfast programmes.
Labelling and Warnings
Breaches of taste and decency in broadcasting can cause
particular offence when they are encountered with little or no warning. Broadcasters have to fulfil the conflicting objectives of attracting audiences whilst simultaneously warning other viewers or listeners that they may find a programme offensive.
Providing as much advance information as possible about the nature of programmes can often fulfil both objectives. Research also suggests that clearly worded warnings are appreciated so that people can make informed choices about what to watch and what
to allow their children to view. Respondents are able to differentiate between the sorts of warnings appropriate to different programme genres.
Taste and decency
Challenging or deliberately flouting the boundaries of taste
in drama and comedy is a time- honoured tradition going back to Shakespeare, Chaucer and beyond. The tradition has a rightful place in broadcasting. Comedy has a special freedom but this does not give unlimited licence to be crude or cruel, or to
humiliate individuals or groups gratuitously.
Matters of taste shift quite quickly and vary from one age or social group to another. They often relate to subjects which can cause embarrassment or upset. Matters of decency, however, are based on
deeper, more fundamental values and emotions: the respect owed to the bereaved at funerals is one example. Offence to decency has the potential to cause more significant difficulty, and should thus be given the highest priority when considering the
suitability of items for broadcast.
Swearing
The use of language of all kinds is never static; words acquire new meanings and interpretations and levels of offence undergo constant change. The impact of particular words can differ
between generations and between different parts of the country, as well as between different tones of voice. There is a range of words, such as 'bugger', 'sod' and 'bastard', which can be terms of near-affection in some places when spoken with particular
emphasis. In other circumstances or places, they remain terms of strong abuse. Language may be offensive because of political, religious or social sensitivities; though language can occasionally have a shock value, expressing moments of extreme stress or
even outrage. There is also a concern that, in constant use, expletives can represent an impoverishment of language and a barrier to communication.
A significant number of complaints arise from the impact on a group of people from watching
together ' different generations of a family or a mixed group of men and women. Each generation has its own language for use among its peers, often including words which if used between generations or strangers would give the deepest offence.
The
protests which are often provoked by bad language in programmes, especially those intended for children, are often protests at breaches of these assumptions. Research has indicated that audiences consider the use of bad language to be unacceptable in
certain circumstances and its repetitive use was disliked by 86% of respondents. Significantly, the level of protest is reduced when the audience accepts the relevance of the language used to the situation portrayed. In recent research, 65% of those
questioned favoured the use of a later transmission time rather than editing, particularly for films containing bad language.
The paramount concern of most adults is for children, especially children under 10. In research conducted by the Commission,
most respondents (89%) said that all programmes shown before the Watershed should contain language suitable for a family audience. Respondents were also concerned about the use of bad language by those whom children take as role models, for example
footballers or pop stars.
The Commission does not lay down rigid rules or a list of banned words. Common sense and a study of the relevant research should indicate where the areas of difficulty lie. However, words and phrases which have sexual
origins or applications cause particular offence. For example, the Commission would expect the abusive use of any of the synonyms for the female genitalia to have been referred to the most senior levels of management.
The Commission considers
there is hardly ever any justification for the use on television of offensive language before the Watershed. This rule should be broken very rarely and never without discussion at the most senior levels within the broadcasting organisations.
While
no Radio Watershed exists, the use of words which give particular offence should also be carefully overseen at senior levels within the broadcasting organisations.
The Broadcasting Standards Council's research in 1991, repeated in 1998, showed how
racist terms and terms implying disability and mental illness have come to be regarded as deeply offensive, outpacing some traditional terms of abuse. Broadcasters should be sensitive to the offence caused by these words to the majority, as well as the
minorities directly affected.
Offences against Religious Sensibilities
The casual use of names, words or symbols regarded as sacred by different sets of believers can cause hurt as well as offence. People of all faiths are distressed by
affronts to their sacred words. This should not be underestimated. For example, while many may not themselves be offended, a majority would not wish to cause offence to others by the casual use of the Christian holy names as expletives. There is
particular offence taken by the linking of the names with sexual swear words. Often, the offence is not intended, but arises from an unawareness of the weight attached to words or symbols which have religious connotations for some of the audience.
Lyrics
The lyrics of contemporary music can also cause problems. Care should be taken over material which glamorises crime and drug-taking, incites aggression, or debases human relationships.
Music videos should observe the limits
applied to drama, bearing in mind the different times at which they are likely to be transmitted. The precise time of scheduling all music videos should be chosen with care.
Drugs
Drugs provide a legitimate subject matter for both
factual and fictional programmes, but nothing should be done to promote their irresponsible or illegal use.
Alcohol and Smoking
Given the health and other risks, neither smoking nor the abuse of alcohol should be glamorised,
especially in programmes directed mainly towards the young.
Portrayal of violence Violence takes many forms. War. The outrages committed by terrorists. Human conflict in daily life and popular fiction. The antics of cartoon characters. Body
contact sports. The ravages of natural disaster. They are facts of life. So long as it exists in society, television and radio programmes will reflect it, portray it and report it. Broadcasters have a duty to show real life in a violent world where
natural disasters and human actions wreak havoc. To seek to prevent broadcasters from telling and retelling hard truths about the world would be a substantial disservice both to democracy and to our understanding of the human condition. The portrayal of
violence has played a major part in popular storytelling throughout human history, and continues to have a place in the civilising process of which broadcasting is a part.
There are some significant concerns about the portrayal of violence which
broadcasters need to take into consideration. These include the fear that repeated exposure to violence desensitises audiences, making them apathetic towards increases in actual violence or indifferent to the plight of victims or the copycat effect '
outbreaks of violence similar to those shown on the screen ' which could be a consequence of showing it in detail. Viewers might identify screen violence with the reality of their own lives and become unreasonably fearful, for instance, being scared to
go out at night alone. It could also encourage the view that violence is acceptable as the means of resolving disputes.
In scheduling a programme containing violence, especially where it is violence with which viewers may identify closely,
broadcasters should consider the programmes placed each side of it, as well as the time of transmission. A sequence of programmes containing violence can rarely be justified.
News & Explicitness
A balance needs to be struck between
the demands of truth and the danger of desensitising people. Where scenes of violence are included in television news bulletins, the fact that violence has bloody consequences should not be glossed over. There is also a danger of sanitising violence.
However:
- the dead should be treated with respect and not shown in close-up unless there are compelling reasons for doing so
- close-ups of the injuries suffered by victims should generally be avoided
- care should be taken not to linger unduly
on the physical consequences of violence.
Decency requires that people should be allowed to die in private. Only in the rarest circumstances should broadcasters show the intimate moments of death itself.
Neither explicit hangings nor other judicial executions should be shown before the
Watershed, except in the rarest of circumstances. Careful editorial consideration ought to be given at the most senior levels of management before such material is broadcast. Subsequent broadcasts should happen only after their relevance in a new context
has been carefully assessed.
Violence in Drama
Violence is a legitimate ingredient of drama, but should seldom be an end in itself. The context of the violence, and the audience's ability to appreciate the conventions within which
the drama is being played out, will be key. Research indicates that respondents are most shocked when violence occurs in locations that seem familiar to them, and with which they can identify, particularly if that violence 'erupts' and cannot be
foreseen. Violence in situations which are more distant, and which are further from their own reality, are less likely to impact; whereas the apparently gratuitous intrusion of violence into locations regarded as places of safety can be deeply shocking.
The impression of violence goes beyond the number of punches thrown or guns fired and is connected with the audience's expectations. Research suggests that people are more concerned when the act of violence is personal and shown explicitly and
realistically. Action films and thriller or adventure series create a perception of violence because of the subject matter, and the noise of running feet, shouting and squealing tyres and the firing of weapons, but these are considered to be less
realistic and therefore less disturbing. It is the combination of pain, cruelty and viciousness in a recognisable situation which causes anxiety as fictional violence is seen by some as more real than the actual violence of war in a far off place.But the
serious consequences of violence should not be glossed over ' in real life a blow to the head which fells a man is unlikely to be cured by a ritual head-shaking as the victim swiftly gets to his feet.
Genre Movies
Some film genres, such
as the Western, sci-fi, action adventures, Japanese cartoons or action thrillers present violence as cartoon. In depicting violence which in other contexts would be unacceptable, it is important to schedule programmes appropriately and ensure that they
are trailed so that audiences can exercise informed judgment on whether to watch. It is also important to have pre-transmission announcements where appropriate.
Broadcasters should also consider whether a cartoon breaches unacceptable limits of
violence.
Children and Drama
Some pre-Watershed drama, especially soaps, will deal with adult issues. But broadcasters should be aware that some children can be disturbed by violence in familiar surroundings. Contemporary domestic
violence is potentially distressing, while violence set in a distant land or in another era may be less disturbing for children. The general principles covering violence in drama will need to be observed with even greater care.
In drama produced
for children, the themes and content will cover a narrower range than drama for adult audiences. The levels of violence permissible in some adult plays would be unacceptable for broadcasts aimed at children or when children are likely to be viewing.
Care should be taken to avoid:
- suggesting that violence does not injure people or have consequences for the perpetrator as well as the victim;
- implying that violence does not cause long-term damage or psychological harm;
- showing dangerous conduct which might be
copied by children;
- suggesting that characters, especially those likely to be children's heroes, resort easily to violence as the means of resolving differences capable of resolution by other means.
Traditional children's cartoons do not normally raise concerns, but the character of some modern day cartoons means that parents should not assume that all cartoons will be suitable for younger audiences. Broadcasters should also alert parents by both
scheduling and providing adequate information about a cartoon's content.
Imitation
On television the use of weapons, particularly knives or other objects readily available in the home, should be considered carefully. Care should also be
taken not to give detailed instructions on how to make explosives.
Portrayal of sexual conduct
Research shows that audiences in Britain have generally become more liberal and relaxed about the portrayal of sex, but broadcasters
cannot assume a universal climate of tolerance towards sexually explicit material. Offence may be given by making public and explicit what many people regard as private and exclusive.
Radio and television have to meet the expectations of wide
audiences which will encompass a spectrum of tolerance towards the portrayal of sexual relationships. However, even those unlikely to be offended themselves may be concerned about viewing some programmes in the company of others, and are likely to be
mindful of the effects on children. Broadcasters have a duty to act responsibly and reflect the fact that relations within and between the sexes normally reflect moral choices. Audiences should not be reduced to voyeurs, nor the participants to objects.
The youth and physical attractiveness of the participants are no justification for explicitness.
Sensitive scheduling, especially within the hour around the Watershed, is particularly important for items involving sexual matters. Broadcasters
should provide straightforward labelling in clear language and sufficient warnings about programmes containing explicit material.
Encrypted subscription and Pay Per View services offering explicit sexual content cater to self- selected adult
audiences. But the depiction of sex is bound by the law relating to hard-core pornography and obscenity.
Factual Programmes
Where a news story involves a sexual aspect, it should be presented without undue exploitation. The relative
explicitness of such reports must, in any case, be measured by the broadcaster against the time of day at which they are transmitted and the likely presence of children in the audience. Other factual programmes deal with a variety of sexual themes. But
producers should ask themselves whether an explicit representation is justified. Fiction
Broadcasters must ensure that actual sexual intercourse is not transmitted. The broadcast of sexually explicit scenes before the Watershed should
always be a matter for judgment at the most senior levels within the broadcasting organisations. On radio, broadcasters must take into account the likely composition of the audience before scheduling more explicit portrayals of sexual activity.
When a scene involves rape or indecent assault, careful consideration must always be given to achieving the dramatic purpose while minimising the depiction of the details. Rape should not be presented in a way which might suggest it was anything other than a tragedy for its victim.
Children
A sexual relationship between an adult and a child or between under-age young people can be a legitimate theme for programmes: it is the treatment which may make it improper, or even unlawful. The treatment should not suggest that
such behaviour is legal or is to be encouraged. Explicit sexual acts between adults and children should not be transmitted.
The Protection of Children Act, 1978, makes it an offence to take an indecent photograph, film or video-recording of a
child under the age of 16, or involve a child below 16 in a photograph or recording which is itself indecent ' even if the child's role in it is not. Even when legal advice judges material to be on the right side of the law, it should be subjected to
careful scrutiny at the highest level over the need to include the sequence in the programme. This applies even when the child is played by an older actor or actress.
Incest and Child Abuse The inclusion of these subjects in
well-established serials or single programmes may be justified as public information, even in programmes directed at older children. These programmes may also play a legitimate role in warning children of the dangers of abuse, and advising them of the
help available.
Where a play or film takes incest as its theme, there should be particular awareness of the relative ease with which some people, including children, may identify characters or actions with their own circumstances, and may also
take them as role models.
In television, material of this kind should be accompanied by clear labelling of the programme's content, while sensitive scheduling and labelling are also called for in radio.
Animals
Explicit sexual
conduct between humans and animals should never be shown and should be referred to in programmes only after consultations at a senior level.
Nudity
There is now a greater relaxation about the human body. The appearance of the nude
human body can have a justifiable and powerful dramatic effect and be a legitimate element in a programme, provided it does not exploit the nude person. But it can also be disturbing and cause offence, especially where it appears that there is no clear
editorial rationale. The justification must come from the intention and the merit of the individual programme itself.
Innuendo
Sexual humour and innuendo may cause offence especially if broadcast when there are children and young
people in the audience. It may pass over the heads of the young, but may nevertheless cause embarrassment to older people watching or listening with them. Care is needed therefore in the scheduling of risqué programmes and programmes which would not
normally be expected to contain material of this kind.
Section 107 of the Broadcasting Act 1996
