Investigation Report No. 2941
ACMA file reference / ACMA2013/91Licensee / Channel Seven Melbourne Pty Ltd
Station / HSV (7Mate),Melbourne
Type of Service / Commercial Television Service
Name of Program / World’s Wildest Police Videos
Date of Broadcast / 31 October 2012
Relevant Legislation/Code / Broadcasting Services Act 1992
- Section 149
- Clause 2.4 (Classification of Other Material)
- Appendix 4 (Television Classification Guidelines – The Mature (M) Classification)
- 4.1 Violence
Investigation conclusion
- No breach of clause 2.4 (Classification of Other Material) of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2010.
The complaint
On 7 January 2013, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (the ACMA) received a written complaint about an episode of World’s Wildest Police Videos. The episodewas broadcast by Channel Seven MelbournePty Ltd (HSV) at 9.30 pmon 31 October 2012.
The complaint alleged that the M classified program contained inappropriate depictions of violence.
Not satisfied with the response provided by the licensee, the complainant forwarded the matter to the ACMA for investigation.
The program
In its 10 December 2012 submission to the complainant, the licensee stated that:
[…] World’s Wildest Police Videos is a reality television series made in the USA, which brings together police videos, CCTV, newsagencies and footage shot by citizens and witnesses from around the work.
[…]
Typically, an episode will comprise a number of stolen car chases and high speed pursuits, some CCTV footage or robberies and usually one or two unusual events. Occasionally, episodes are dedicated to police officers killed in the line of duty.
The episode broadcast on 31 October 2012 contains footage of armed robberies, car chases and a jailbreak attempt. The program’s presenter and narrator, Sheriff John Bunnell, describes each of the scenarios as they unfold and the consequences for those involved.
World’s Wildest Police Videos was broadcast on 7Mate by HSV at 9.30pm on 31 October 2012, with an M classification.
Assessment
The assessment is based on a copy of the relevant broadcast provided to the ACMA by the licensee and submissions from the complainant and the licensee.
Relevant Provisions
The Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2010 (the Code) contains the following provisions that are relevant to the matter raised in the complaint:
SECTION 2: CLASSIFICATION
[…]
Classification of Other Material
2.4 All other material for broadcast: Subject to Clauses 2.3 and 2.4.1, all other material for broadcast must be classified according to the Television Classification Guidelines (set out in Appendix 4) or, where applicable, the stricter requirements of Section 3: Program Promotions and Section 6: Classification and Placement of Commercials.
[…]
Appendix 4: TELEVISION CLASSIFICATION GUIDELINES
[…]
The Mature (M) Classification
4. Material classified M is recommended for viewing only by persons aged 15 years or over because of the matter it contains, or of the way this matter is treated.
[…]
4.1 Violence: May be realistically shown only if it is note frequent or of high impact, and is justified by the story line or program context. Violence should not be presented as desirable in its own right. Any visual depiction of or verbal reference to violence occurring in a sexual context must be infrequent and restrained, and strictly justified by the story line or program context.
Complainant’s submissions
In correspondence to the licensee, dated 31 October 2012, the complainant stated the following:
This program included close up footage of real people being killed by gun fire. These deaths are presented as entertainment. I think that presenting the violent deaths of real people in graphic detail is voyeuristic and disgusting.
[…]
In correspondence to the ACMA, dated 7 January 2013, the complainant stated the following:
[…]
In October 2012 Channel 7 Melbourne aired an episode of ‘World’s Wildest Police Videos’ which contained a segment in which a person robs a hotel cashier and takes him hostage. A police officer intervenes and shoots the robber at close range with 5 or 6 shots, killing him. It is a graphic close up scene of [a] real person being killed.
[…]
The program was classified M. The Code states that M classified programs may be shown realistically if it is not frequent or high impact.
The scene in question is obviously a breach of the code. A person is killed by repeated, graphic close up gunfire. He is seen pleading for mercy before he is shot for the last time. The scene is shown over and over, including a slow motion section.
Licensee’s submissions
In correspondence to the complainant, dated 10 December 2012, the licensee stated:
[…]
In the episode to which you refer we are taken to the foyer of a hotel in Sao Paulo. The sequence, of approximately two minutes duration, shows a clerk sitting behind his desk. He admits a man in a hooded jacket, who then produces a gun. The gun is so grainy that it needs to be indicated with a red circle. The robber is seen leaning across the desk and taking cash from the drawer. As he turns to make his getaway a policeman comes up the stairs and blocks his escape. The hooded man then takes the clerk hostage and uses him as a shield as the officer tries to place himself for a clear shot. The hooded man returns fire and the hostage manages to break free. The policeman is pictured at the corner of the desk, the thief on the floor in the corner, virtually out of frame.
From a classification perspective, the scene [identified in the complaint] is brief, in long shot caught from the perspective of the CCTV camera, and lacks detail. It is for these reasons that this scene, and the episode as a whole, conforms to the requirements of the Code in the M classification.
[…]
In correspondence to the ACMA, dated 8 February 2013, the licensee stated:
[…]
The episode of World’s Wildest Police Videos referred to by the complainant is one hour in total and includes nearly twenty different scenarios involving police officers in the course of their duties.
[…]
The particular Segment to which the complainant refers is approximately 1 minute and 45 seconds in total and is considered brief in the context of the program.
[…]
The Segment is brief and relies heavily on the voice-over narration to describe the event, as the visuals are grainy and insufficiently clear or detailed for the viewer to be able to independently verify the events that are unfolding. In fact, at some stages in the Segment the viewer must rely entirely on the voiceover description due to the poor quality of the vision. For example, when the policeman is described as pointing his gun at the hooded man, a red circle indicates to viewers where the gun is. Similarly, at the end of the Segment when the hooded man is seen to be lying on the floor behind the desk, it is only from the voiceover that it is clear the man’s wounds were fatal.
The violence in the Segment is justified within the context of the hold-up scenario as well as within the broader context of the program itself. Furthermore, violence is not presented as “desirable in its own right”, nor is it “frequent or of high impact”. The entire Segment is filmed from a static camera angle at a reasonable distance from the individuals. Other factors which mitigate the impact are the apparent lack of urgency in the unfoldment of the event as narrated by Sherriff Bunnell, the lack of any detail of the impact of the shots and reactions of the participants. The static position of the camera and the obscuring effect of the layout of the room also assist to mitigate the impact of the Segment, including the final scene where the hooded man is on the floor partially out of frame.
[…]
Finding
The ACMA finds that Channel Seven Melbourne Pty Ltd, in broadcasting World’s Wildest Police Videos on31 October 2012, did not breach clause 2.4 (Classification of Other Material)of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2010.
Reasons
The Code states that violence at the M classification may be realistically shown if it is not frequent or of high impact and is justified by the story line or program context. Violence should not be presented as desirable in its own right.
The episode of World’s Wildest Police Videos broadcast on 31 October 2012 contained depictions of violence, in the form of accidents, fights and criminal activity.
The scene identified in the complaint occurs at 06:35 minutes. Security camera footage depicts a hooded man attempting an armed robbery in a hotel lobby. As the hooded man flees the scene, he is blocked by an individual described by the narrator as an armed police officer. The hooded man responds by attempting to take ahotel employeeas a hostage. While the hooded man and the hotel employeegrapple with each other, the police officer appears to fire his pistol at the hooded man and the hotel employee escapes. Given the camera angle, the hooded man is only partially visible as he falls behind the hotel counter. It is not apparent that the hooded man has been shot until the narrator describes his injuries as being fatal. This scene is replayed in a series of brief clips, which depicts the scenario in an abridged form. The accompanying audio consists primarily of the narrator’s commentary about the incident and includes the sound of each gunshot fired.
The segment is less than twominutes in duration. The footage is low quality and grainy, and the incident is depicted from an oblique angle that overlooks the scene. Although the hooded man is described as being fatally injured, no wound is visible.
The impact of the segment is considered to be significantly mitigated by the low level of detail visible. The seriousness of the incident is evident only from the accompanying narration. The shooting is contextualised by the preceding events in which the hotel employeeand police officer’s lives appear to be threatened. Further, the inclusion of the segment, within a program about real-life incidents captured on camera, is justified.
During the approximately 60 minute program, a further fifteen separate segments are shown that include 10car chases, two attempted robberies, anattemptedprison escape, a grenade explosion and a minor car accident. Depictions of violence are brief and there islimited detail due to the poorquality of the footage and the typically static camera angles.
The majority of the footage is of the events and action leading up to an accident and, or apprehension, making the depictions of violence and accidents relatively infrequent within the context of a 60 minute program. Further, the depictions of violence are considered to be justified within the context of a reality program which focuses on criminal activity.
Violence in the episodeis portrayed as having undesirable consequences. Further, the narration provides a context for the actions of police officers, who generally take action to protect innocent bystanders. The use of violence is not presented as being desirable in its own right at any point.
For the above reasons, the program is considered to comply with requirements that violence at the M classification shouldnot be frequent or high in impact, nor presented as desirable in its own right. Accordingly, the violence can be accommodated withinthe M classification.
ACMA Investigation Report – World’s Wildest Police Videos broadcast by HSV (7Mate) on 31October2012 1