Last week the UK Office of Communications (Ofcom) cleared Channel Five of breaching its programming codes despite broadcasting the word "cunt" just after the 9pm watershed. The word was broadcast as part of a documentary called Britain's Fattest Teenager. In its finding, Ofcom summarised the incident in this way:
This was a documentary about a teenager who had to deal with his problems of excessive weight. Three viewers complained about the unedited use of the word “cunt”, at 21:12 , by the teenager in this programme. The word was used by him in relation to the insults he was subjected to.
Channel Five submitted that the use of the word "cunt" was appropriate given the subject matter and context of the documentary. Channel Five also submitted "that the programme was preceded by a strong language warning, and the Controller at Five responsible for the programme specifically sanctioned the use of this language which, it was felt, was important in telling Jonathan’s story." In clearing Channel Five, Ofcom published these reasons:
Research into swearing carried out by Ofcom (Language and Sexual Imagery in Broadcasting: A Contextual Investigation, September 2005) indicates that the word “cunt” is amongst those considered the most offensive . The Code states that broadcasters must ensure that its use must be justified by the context.
Ofcom considered that this was a serious documentary recording the difficulties faced by a teenager with weight problems. The use of the word by Jonathan was not aggressive but used by the teenager when describing the regular abuse he suffered. Ofcom acknowledged Five’s explanation that to bleep out the word might have lessened the impact of such abuse and its effects on the boy. Ofcom also noted that the programme was preceded by a verbal warning, “The programme contains strong language…”. The impact of the word was also lessened as it was not necessarily readily distinguishable.
Taking the above into account, on this occasion, Ofcom did not consider there was a breach of the Code. However it should be noted that only in exceptional cases will it be acceptable to broadcast the word “cunt” close to the watershed. Further, Ofcom believed that, given the time of broadcast, the warning could have been clearer. Many viewers would describe this language not as “strong” – but in fact the strongest. As the Code states, such information may assist in avoiding or minimising offence.
This decision seems plainly right to me. However, it made me think about what would the situation be in Australia. Explicit expletives such as "cunt" are allowed on Australian commercial free-to-air TV at the MA15+ classification. This means that it could be broadcast between 9pm and 5am provided that it is "appropriate to the story line or program context and not overly frequent or impactful." That said, to my knowledge the word "cunt" has never been uttered on Australian free-to-air TV (please correct me if I'm wrong), and I think that it would be controversial no matter what the time.
I find language and it's uses more than a little fascinating.
You could use that word in a court room at any time of the day (in the right context) and no one would blink an eye - probably not even the saintly looking little old lady in the corner of the jury box.
On the other hand you could use it in the same place and not in the right context and run the risk of going to jail for a few days to give you time to contemplate the error of your ways.
Just seems odd to me somehow
Posted by: Stuart | Wednesday, 24 January 2007 at 05:12 PM