Investigation Report 2741
File No. / ACMA 2011/1958Broadcaster / Channel Seven Brisbane Pty Ltd
Station / BTQ Brisbane
Type of service / Commercial television broadcasting service
Name of program / Sunday Night
Date of program / 4 September 2011
Relevant Code / Clauses 4.3.1, 1.5.2 and 1.9.6 of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2010
Date finalised / 6 August 2012
Outcome / Channel Seven Brisbane Pty Ltd:
· did not breach clause 4.3.1 of the Code in relation to the reference to ‘stone age’;
· did not breach clause 4.3.1 of the Code in relation to the references ‘lost tribe’ and ‘lost world’;
· breached clause 4.3.1 of the Code in relation to the statement ‘Here, we’re outside the protection of Brazilian law’;
· breached clause 4.3.1 of the Code in relation to the statements, ‘These lost tribes encourage the murder of disabled children’ and ‘The Suruwaha believe that children born with birth defects or born to a single mother are evil spirits and should be killed in the most gruesome way possible’;
· breached clause 1.9.6 of the Code; and
· in relation to the manner in which the Suruwaha tribe was depicted, the ACMA makes no finding in relation to the licensee’s compliance with clause 4.3.1
The complaint
The Australian Communications and Media Authority (the ACMA) received a complaint about the program, Sunday Night, broadcast by Channel Seven Brisbane Pty Ltd, the licensee of BTQ, on 4 September 2011. The complainant submitted that the program about the Suruwaha Amazon tribe was factually inaccurate and racially offensive.
The complainant was not satisfied with the response provided by the licensee and complained to the ACMA.[1]
The investigation has considered the licensee’s compliance with clauses 4.3.1 [factual accuracy] and 1.9.6 [provoke or perpetuate intense dislike, serious contempt or severe ridicule on the grounds of ethnic origin] of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice 2010 (the Code).
The program
Sunday Night is a one hour current affairs program and is broadcast at 6.30 pm on Sundays. On 4 September 2011, the relevant segment ran for approximately 20 minutes and reported on the Suruwaha tribe in the Amazon jungle in Brazil.
The segment featured the reporter and an author and adventurer (referred to here as PR) as well as officers from Brazil’s Department of Indian Affairs travelling through the Amazon jungle and meeting the Suruwaha people. The report filmed the Suruwaha hunting, conducting rituals and living their daily life and included interviews with two young Suruwaha men, A and W, and a human rights lawyer (referred to here as MB). It also filmed a Suruwaha mother and child in São Paulo, Brazil.
A transcript of the broadcast is at Attachment A.
Assessment
The ACMA’s assessment is based on written submissions from the complainant and the licensee and a copy of the broadcast provided by the licensee. Other sources used have been identified where relevant.
In assessing content against the Code, the ACMA considers the meaning conveyed by the relevant material. This is assessed according to the understanding of an ‘ordinary, reasonable’ listener or viewer.
Australian Courts have considered an ‘ordinary, reasonable’ reader (or listener or viewer) to be:
A person of fair average intelligence, who is neither perverse, nor morbid or suspicious of mind, nor avid for scandal. That person 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].
In considering compliance with the Code, the ACMA considers the natural, ordinary meaning of the language, context, tenor, tone, and any inferences that may be drawn. In the case of factual material which is presented, the ACMA will also consider relevant omissions (if any).
Once this test has been applied to ascertain the meaning of the broadcast material, it is for the ACMA to determine whether the material has breached the Code.
Issue 1: Presentation of factual material
Relevant Code Clause
News and Current Affairs Programs
4.3 In broadcasting news and current affairs programs, licensees:
4.3.1 must present factual material accurately and represent viewpoints fairly, having regard to the circumstances at the time of preparing and broadcasting the program;
4.3.1.1 An assessment of whether the factual material is accurate is to be determined in the context of the segment in its entirety.
Compliance with Code
1.5 Licensees must seek to comply fully with the Code, but a failure to comply will not be a breach of the Code if that failure was due to:
...
1.5.2 reasonable reliance on information supplied by another person.
The considerations which the ACMA generally applies in determining whether a statement complies with the licensee’s obligation to present factual material accurately are set out at Attachment B.
Submissions
The key extracts from submissions from the complainant and licensee are set out at Attachments C and D respectively.
Findings
The licensee:
· did not breach clause 4.3.1 of the Code in relation to the reference to ‘stone age’;
· did not breach clause 4.3.1 of the Code in relation to the references ‘lost tribe’ and ‘lost world’;
· breached clause 4.3.1 of the Code in relation to the statement ‘Here, we’re outside the protection of Brazilian law’;
· breached clause 4.3.1 of the Code in relation to the statements, ‘These lost tribes encourage the murder of disabled children’ and ‘The Suruwaha believe that children born with birth defects or born to a single mother are evil spirits and should be killed in the most gruesome way possible’; and
· in relation to the manner in which the Suruwaha tribe was depicted, the ACMA makes no finding in relation to the licensee’s compliance with clause 4.3.1
Reasons For Findings
Statement 1: ‘Stone age’
The report made references (in bold) to ‘stone age’ in the following contexts:
Presenter:… [Reporter] is the first person to document at length the stone age existence of Brazil’s Suruwaha people…
PR: You press a button and suddenly, you’re in the stone age, you’re really there!
Reporter: … We’re being taken by officers from Brazil’s Department of Indian Affairs to one of the world’s last and most isolated stone age tribes…
Reporter: …Here, A is arming a blowpipe with poison darts. So this is one of the marvels of stone age technology.
PR: I believe this is one of the most profound questions facing the world today. What to do with these stone age tribes?
What would the references have conveyed to an ordinary reasonable viewer?
The ACMA considers that the term ‘stone age’ was used in a broad sense in line with the Dictionary definition provided by the licensee which extends to ‘pertaining to, characteristic of, or resembling (that of) the Stone Age’; fig primitive, outmoded’.
Taking into account the report in its entirety, the ACMA considers that the ordinary, reasonable viewer would have understood the references to ‘stone age’, as meaning that the Suruwaha were living an unsophisticated lifestyle, similar to the lifestyle that people would have led during the Stone Age period, as opposed to a claim that the Suruwaha people were technically or literally living a ‘stone age’ existence in terms of the absence of any metal tools. In this regard, the ACMA accepts the licensee’s submission that, having regard to the context in which the references were made, it is apparent that the term referred to the Suruwaha’s apparent unfamiliarity with modern day items such as mirrors, books and electrical equipment and the hunting rituals and tools used by the Suruwaha people.
Was the information conveyed accurate?
The issue to determine is whether the impression conveyed by the broadcast that the Suruwaha tribe are living an unsophisticated lifestyle similar to that which people would have led during the Stone Age period, albeit with the use of metal rather than stone tools, is accurate.
In considering the licensee’s colloquial use of the term “stone age” to denote the type of lifestyle the Suruwaha are living, the ACMA accepts that the Suruwaha are living a lifestyle that is different to the modern day lifestyle most people are accustomed to, in the sense that they appear to live, largely, without the routine use of modern amenities such as electricity, motorised transport and telecommunications.
To the extent that the lifestyle of the Suruwaha people can be considered to have some, if not all, of the characteristics of the lifestyle led during Stone Age period, the ACMA considers that the use of the term ‘stone age” was not inaccurate in this context.
Statement 2: ‘lost tribe’ and ‘lost world’
The report made references (in bold) to ‘lost tribe’ and ‘lost world’ in the following contexts:
Reporter: The more I got to know them, the clearer it became that there were other more disturbing practices. These lost tribes encourage the murder of disabled children.
Reporter: There is good and evil in this lost world, but there are no easy answers as to what will or should happen next.
What would the references have conveyed to an ordinary reasonable viewer?
The ACMA considers that the terms ‘lost tribe’ and ‘lost world’ would have conveyed to the ordinary, reasonable viewer that the Suruwaha tribe is relatively isolated from others and/or ‘modern day’ people. The following statement indicates that ‘few’ people are ‘allowed in’ to see the tribe, thus reinforcing the impression that the tribe has had little contact with ‘modern day’ people.
Reporter: …To protect the Amazon Indians, the government has closed off this region to the outside world. Only a few are ever allowed in…
Was the information conveyed accurate?
The issue to determine is whether the impression conveyed by the broadcast is accurate.
The complainant provided advice from archaeologists indicating that the tribe has had ‘regular contact with both governmental agencies and nongovernmental organisations since the early 1980’s’ and ‘about half of all living Suruwaha’ have visited various cities. The complainant also provided media reports indicating that members of the tribe have travelled to cities for medical treatment and referred to various films taken of the tribe.
The licensee submitted that the tribe’s contact with the ‘outside world’ has been infrequent since the 1980’s, given that contact was forbidden by the National Indian Foundation, Funai, a number of years ago, and is limited to seeking medical treatment. The licensee provided translated interview transcripts with a Funai official, a Suruwaha tribe member and advice from PR supporting its submission.
Having considered the submissions provided, the ACMA accepts that Funai, the National Indian Foundation, restricts outside contact with the Suruwaha. The Brazilian magazine, Veja, published an article on 9 November 2011 regarding the licensee’s contact with the Suruwaha:
It is estimated that at least seventy tribes remain isolated in the Amazon. Funai restricts any contact with these people. Last July, Funai decided to make an exception. The organisation authorised entry of a news crew from Channel 7, Australia, into the land of the Indians Suruwaha in southern Amazonas...[3]
While the complainant and the licensee have provided conflicting submissions regarding the extent to which the Suruwaha have travelled outside the Amazon, the ACMA notes that it does not appear to be in dispute that the Suruwaha have travelled to South American cities on occasion to seek medical treatment. Given the isolation of the Suruwaha in the Amazon jungle and government’s restriction on contact with the tribe, the ACMA finds that the impression conveyed by the broadcast that the tribe is relatively isolated ‘from modern day’ people is not inaccurate.
Statement 3: The manner in which the Suruwaha tribe was depicted
The complainant submitted that the licensee breached clause 4.3.1 of the Code by instructing those Suruwaha who were wearing Western clothing when the film crew arrived to take that clothing off before filming commenced. Clause 4.3.1 does not require that a representation be by way of verbal statements. Accordingly, an inaccurate visual representation may contravene the provision.
In support of the submission, the complainant provided an email from the film crew’s guide, [the guide], who stated that:
When it came to clothing, [PR] and [the reporter] had an attitude of wanting to show only the 'strongest and best-looking' Suruwaha, without industrialised clothes, like caps or T-shirts (present today in the village, used mainly for fishing and hunting trips).
The licensee has strongly disputed the complainant’s claim and submitted that:
Seven was completely reliant on [the guide] to communicate with the tribe. Therefore, even if Seven’s reporter or [PR] had wanted to insist the Suruwaha remove items of clothing or act in a manner that was inconsistent with their way of life or culture (which they did not), it can only be assumed that such a request would not have been translated by [the guide] and that Seven’s reporter and [PR] would have followed any advice given by [the guide] as to what was appropriate in dealing with the Suruwaha and accurately recording their way of life.
The licensee also provided photographs of the Suruwaha taken months before the licensee’s crew arrived depicting members of the tribe naked with some wearing decorative body paint, and unedited footage of the reporter’s arrival at the Suruwaha territory.
The issue in contention is whether the licensee’s crew asked their guide and interpreter, to instruct the Suruwaha to remove Western caps and t-shirts. The guide has advised the complainant that this was the case, however, the licensee rejects that its crew made such a request.
The ACMA has been presented with conflicting information and no independent corroboration of either version. In these circumstances, the ACMA makes no finding in relation to compliance with the code.
Statement 4: ‘Here, we’re outside the protection of Brazilian law’
The statement above was made in the following context (in bold):
A female tribe member: He’s looking at me. That tall white man there [in subtitles].
Reporter: But then the mood changes.
A tribe member: Don’t touch him, don’t touch him!
Reporter: There are threats of murder.
PR: Who wants to kill me? The girl? She wants to kill me?
Department of Indian Affairs Officer: Because she’s scared.