Investigation Report No. 2792
File No. / ACMA2012/490Licensee / Special Broadcasting Service
Station / SBS Perth
Type of Service / National Broadcasting Service
Name of Program / Promotion for Once Upon a Time in Cabramatta
Date/s of Broadcast / 1 January 2012
Relevant Legislation/Code / SBS Codes of Practice 2006
Clause 1.3: Prejudice, racism and discrimination
Date Finalised / 19 April 2012
Decision / No breach of clause 1.3 (prejudice, racism and discrimination)
Background
· The complaint concerns a promotion for the documentary series Once Upon a Time in Cabramatta (the Program), series 1 of which screened from 8 January 2012 until 22 January 2012 on the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS).
· The Program was a series of documentaries which, in the words of its website, is the “untold story of how the Vietnamese community overcame the odds and found their place in multicultural Australia”, detailing the wave of migration of refugees after the Vietnam war and the subsequent “arrival of street gangs, a heroin epidemic and the first political assassination in Australia’s history” that much of the Vietnamese community encountered in Australia during the 1980’s and 1990’s. The Program also explores the fact that “the Vietnamese people are vilified and demonised” and that “Cabramatta it seems represents all that is wrong with Asian immigration”.[1]
· A series of promotions for the Program ran on SBS in the weeks leading up to its broadcast. One of the promotions (the Promotion), which had a duration of 30 seconds, featured a brief snapshot of the first episode of the Program. A transcript of the Promotion and accompanying images can be found in the attachment below.
· During the Promotion, a Caucasian man can be seen on a crowded street uttering the words “look around ya, all these little slanty-eyes... people buzzin’ around”.
· The complainant was concerned that these words, said in a “deregulatory [sic] tone”, “particularly reflects poorly on SBS which is the best (by a huge margin) TV channel for ethnic diversity”. He later added that:
my complaint is specific to the Promotion only. The Promotion did NOT in anyway indicated [sic] that these attitudes were unfortunate. The Promotion on its own is a covert act of racism.
· This investigation has considered SBS’ compliance with clause 1.3 of the Special Broadcasting Service Codes of Practice 2006 (the Code), which reads as follows:
1.3 Prejudice, Racism and Discrimination
SBS seeks to counter attitudes of prejudice against any person or group on the basis of their race, ethnicity, nationality, sex, age, sexual preference, religion, disability, mental illness, or marital, parental or occupational status. While remaining consistent with its mandate to portray diversity, SBS will avoid programming which clearly condones, tolerates or encourages discrimination on these grounds.
...
SBS aims to ensure that programs either counter or do not promote, endorse, or reinforce inaccurate, demeaning or discriminatory stereotypes.
· This assessment is based on a recording of the segment in question supplied to the ACMA by the SBS, submissions from the complainant and correspondence between the SBS and the complainant. Other sources have been identified where relevant.
Was the Promotion Prejudiced, Racist or Discriminatory?
Finding
The SBS did not breach clause 1.3 of the Code.
Reasons
· Clause 1.3 of the Code seeks to counter attitudes of prejudice against any person or group on the basis of, amongst other things, race, ethnicity or nationality. In this regard, clause 1.3 prohibits the broadcast of programs that condone, tolerate or encourage discrimination or promote, endorse, or reinforce inaccurate, demeaning or discriminatory stereotypes.
· This clause is to be interpreted in line with an “ordinary reasonable viewer’s” perception of the program material in question. Courts have described an “ordinary, reasonable viewer” as:
A person of fair average intelligence, who is neither perverse, nor morbid or suspicious of mind, nor avid for scandal. An ordinary, reasonable listener does not live in an ivory tower, but can and does read between the lines in the light of that person’s general knowledge and experience of worldly affairs.[2]
· Pursuant to the introduction of Part 1 of the Code:
An important consideration in the application of ... [the Code] is context. What is unacceptable in one context may be appropriate and acceptable in another.
· The ACMA considers that the description of the inhabitants of Cabramatta by the unnamed man in the Promotion as “slanty-eyed” did not serve to condone, tolerate or encourage discrimination against Vietnamese people, nor did it endorse or reinforce inaccurate, demeaning or discriminatory stereotypes against them as regarded by an ordinary, reasonable viewer.
· This is due entirely to the context in which the phrase was used. As stated by the SBS in its submissions:
It is clear that the comment “slanty eyes” is included as an historical reference for the purpose of implied criticism. It was included within the promotion to quickly indicate to the audience precisely the unacceptable level of racism that the Vietnamese and Cambodian communities in Cabramatta endured.
[...]
It was clearly historical footage and it was used to indicate attitudes which were unfortunately prevalent on the streets of Cabramatta during that period.
[...]
The “slanty eyes” comment illustrates how [the social climate of Australia] clashed with white Australia ... It is not a random racial slur included for shock value, it is within context in the promo, just as it is in context within the program.
· The ACMA accepts SBS’ submissions in this regard. The footage serves to condemn prejudicial or racist views of Vietnamese in Cabramatta as opposed to encouraging such views.
· Immediately prior to the footage being shown, a segment of Ms Pauline Hanson’s infamous “swamped by Asians” maiden speech to the Australian Parliament can be heard, accompanied by sombre music, creating a sense of gloom. After this, the words “a dramatic start to modern multiculturalism” are narrated. This introduction serves to immediately portray the man who makes the “slanty-eyes” comment in a negative light.
· The ACMA considers that an ordinary, reasonable viewer would, in the context of the Promotion, understand that showing the “slanty-eyes” phrase was in effect an indictment of prejudice and racism as opposed to condoning or encouraging it. This is the case despite the Promotion’s brevity. The mood created by the short excerpt of Ms Hanson’s speech and the accompanying music would make it clear to the ordinary, reasonable viewer that the man’s unsavoury remark was used in order to condemn the bigotry exhibited by many Australians, not to endorse it.
· The ACMA acknowledges that the complainant was offended by the comment. When viewed in the context of the Promotion, however, it is considered that the elements of clause 1.3 of the Code have not been satisfied.
· Accordingly, the ACMA is of the view that the material complained about has not breached clause 1.3.
Attachment: Transcript of the Promotion
Narrator - Next Sunday... / A shot of the bow of a boat crashing through a heavy swell as viewed from the vessel itself.
Pauline Hanson (excerpt from her maiden speech to the Australian Parliament) - We are in danger of being swamped by Asians... They form ghettos and do not assimilate. / A piece of archival footage depicting a crowded Australian street with predominantly Asian passers-by, followed by some Asian women shopping for vegetables. This is followed by a brief snapshot of immigration papers with the accompanying sound of a camera’s shutters clicking.
Narrator – A dramatic start to modern mutli-culturalism. / A brief shot of Asian immigrants walking through Australian immigration followed by several rapid-fire, very brief images including a white Australian brandishing the southern cross flag and footage of pro-multi-cultural protestors.
Unnamed white Australian man – Look around ya, all these little slanty-eyes... people buzzin’ around... / Archival footage of the maker of the statement standing on a street followed by several rapid-fire still images including a large crowd of Asian individuals and immigration papers.
Unnamed interviewee – Cabramatta was this extraordinary... experiment. / Aerial footage of suburbia (presumably Cabramatta) followed by the interviewee in a studio.
Narrator – A Sydney suburb made famous for all the wrong reasons. / Archival footage of a police car driving down a road at night with its sirens wailing and another vehicle driving recklessly at night followed by a number of still images including materials that have been seized by police (being held in transparent plastic bags) such as firearms and jewellery. This is followed by archival footage of an obviously injured man being carried out of a building by police.
Unnamed interviewee – As soon as I found out what a gang was, I think I wanted to be in one. / A brief shot of a crimescene followed by footage of the interviewee speaking.
Narrator – Once Upon a Time in Cabramatta begins next Sunday at 8:30 on SBS1 and simultaneously in Vietnamese on SBS2. / A still image of a tattooed Asian man with arms folded, accompanied by the details of the Program and when it is to be broadcast.
ACMA Investigation Report 2792 – Promotion for Once Upon a Time in Cabramatta – SBS – 1 January 2012
[1]http://www.sbs.com.au/shows/onceuponatimeincabramatta/about/page/i/5/h/About-the-Show/
[2] Amalgamated Television Services Pty v Marsden (1998) 43 NSWLR 158 at pp 164-167