Investigation Report No. 2745

File No. / ACMA2012/88
Licensee / Triple M Melbourne Pty Ltd
Station / 3MMM Melbourne
Type of Service / Commercial radio broadcasting service
Name of Program / Jeff & Paul Peanut Gallery
Date of Broadcast / 7 November 2011
Relevant Code / Clause1.3(a) of the Commercial RadioAustralia Codes of Practice and Guidelines 2010
Date Finalised / 11 April 2012
Decision / No breach of clause 1.3(a) (standards of decency)

Background

  • The complaint concerns the program, Jeff & Paul Peanut Gallery, broadcast by Triple M Melbourne Pty Ltd, the licensee of 3MMM, on 7 November 2011. The complainant submitted that comments made on the program about Paris Hilton were highly offensive and degrading to women.
  • In particular, the complainant submitted that the comments ‘normalise the degradation of women and encourage others to treat women as sex objects’.
  • Jeff & Paul Peanut Galleryis broadcast at 7.00 to 9.00 pm from Monday to Thursday each week. The program is described on the licensee’s website as:

Best mates [JW] and [PH] team up in The Peanut Gallery. It’s a bit of footy, a bit of comedy and lots of fun…[1]

  • On 7 November 2011, the following comments were made in the program’s sports update:

Host 1: Get ready for this one. [MV] has won his fourth 125 motor GP race. The Spanish teenager races for Paris Hilton Racing.

Host 2: Paris Hilton Racing!

Host 1: She’s got her own motorbike team! And on Twitter she wrote, ‘OMG my Paris Hilton Team racing rider [MV] just won first place in the motor GP, yes.’

Host 2: You know that Paris Hilton team, not hard to get a ride in that team. She will literally give anyone a ride.

  • The investigation has considered the licensee’s compliance with clauses 1.3(a) [generally accepted standards of decency] of theCommercial Radio Australia Codes of Practice 2010 (the Codes).
  • This investigation is based on a letter of complaint to the ACMA, correspondence between the licensee and the complainantand a copy of the broadcast provided by the licensee. Other sources used have been identified where relevant.
  • When assessing broadcast content against the Code, the ACMA considers the meaning conveyed by the relevant material according to the understanding of an ‘ordinary, reasonable listener’.
  • The ACMA considers the natural, ordinary meaning of the language used; the tenor, tone and context of the material; as well as inferences that may be drawn by the ordinary, reasonable listener.

Issue 1: Generally accepted standards of decency

Relevant Code Clause

Program Content and Language, including Sex and Sexual behaviour

1.3(a)Program content must not offend generally accepted standards of decency (for example, through the use of unjustified language), having regard to the demographic characteristics of the audience of the relevant program.

1.3(b)For the purpose of determining:

(i)the audience of the relevant program; and

(ii)the demographic characteristics of that audience,

Regard must be had, in particular, to the results of any official ratings surveys of the licensees’ service in the prior 12 months, (or, in the case of any licensee service operating in regional areas, the most recent official ratings surveys for the licensee’s service).

Finding

The licensee did not breach clause 1.3(a) of the Codes.

Reasons

  • The Codes requires the ACMA to consider the meaning of the phrase ‘generally accepted standards of decency having regard to the audience demographic characteristics of the relevant program’.
  • The objects of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (the Act) include the promotion of the availability of a diverse range of radio services to audiences throughout Australia[2]. Another object is to encourage providers of broadcasting services to respect community standards in the provision of program material[3].Diverse audiences in Australia will not have everyday tastes and standards in common and further, material that may be regarded as indecent in one context may be acceptable in another. These issues are addressed in the Codes.
  • As noted by the courts, the question of whether material is indecent, ‘given the court must have regard tocontemporary standards in a multicultural, partly secular and largely tolerant, if not permissive society, is not easy’.[4] The courts have said that community standards will be those of the average person who can be summed up as moderate ‘not given to thoughtless emotional reaction’ nor ‘given to pedantic analysis’.[5]
  • The term ‘generally accepted standards of decency’ refers to the current consensus of recognised present day standards of propriety as opposed, for example, to content that is generally considered indecent or coarse.’
  • It follows from this analysis that the average listener recognises that standards of decency are not hard and fast, either over time or across all sections of the community. In particular, he or she may accept that some material he or she considers indecent would not be so judged by other sections of the community; and that, up to a point, those other groups have a right to have such material broadcast in programs to which they listen.
  • Clause 1.3(a) of the Codes further requires the ACMA to have regard to the likely demographic characteristics of a subset of the broad community, being the audience of the relevant program.
  • The ACMA considers that one of the characteristics of a program’s audience is the expectations of that audience. That is, an audience would be entitled to expect that they would not, without warning, hear something outside the usual programming content of that program.
  • Regular listeners would likely be familiar with the Jeff and Paul Peanut Gallery format and the presentation style of the presenters.
  • Accordingly, the question for the ACMAin this case is whether the ordinary, reasonable listener, being reasonably tolerant and accepting of diversity, would consider that the comments about Paris Hiltonoffendgenerally accepted standards of decency, taking into account thelicensee’s audience.
  • Based on the context in which they were made, the ACMA considers that the ordinary, reasonable listener would have understood the relevant comments, ‘You know that Paris Hilton team, not hard to get a ride in that team, she will literally give anyone a ride’ to mean that Paris Hilton will have sex with anyone.
  • The licensee provided the Nielsen statistical data for the audience demographic of 3MMM for the period from 23 October 2010 to 4 December 2011which reveals that 45% of theprogram’s main audience fell within the 24 to 39 age group and that 67% of the program’s audience was male.
  • The ACMA makes the following observations in relation to the broadcast:
  • while the comments indicated that Paris Hilton would have sex with anyone and inferred adult themes, they did not involve explicit sexual references or prolonged descriptive or graphic detail; and
  • the time slot in which the program was broadcast (between 7pm and 9pm) highlights that the program is intended for an adult audience which would be more likely to tolerate the sexualised content in relation to Paris Hilton.
  • The ACMA acknowledges the complainant’s concern regarding the comments. However, for the above reasons, and taking account of the demographics of the audience for the program, the ACMA is satisfied the broadcast did not go beyond generally accepted standards of decency in this case.
  • Accordingly, the licensee did not breach clause 1.3(a) of the Codes.

ACMA Investigation Report – Jeff & Paul Peanut Gallery – 3MMM – 7 November 20111

[1]

[2]See section 3(1)(a) of the Act

[3]See section 3(1)(h) of the Act

[4]Pell v Council of Trustees of the National Gallery of Victoria [1997] VSC 52.

[5]Mackinlay v Wiley [1971] WAR 3 at 25.