Jerry Springer: The Opera

BBC2, 8 January 2005, 22:00

Summary

Ofcom recognises that a large number of people were deeply offended by the transmission of Jerry Springer: The Opera. Nevertheless, it is Ofcoms view that the show was an important work and commentary on modern television.

In assessing these complaints, and in line with our statutory duties, Ofcom has sought to achieve the appropriate balance between, on the one hand, the standards set in the Code (ex-BSC Code on Standards) and the need to apply those standards to give adequate protection from harmful and offensive material, and on the other hand the need to guarantee an appropriate level of freedom of expression. Freedom of expression is particularly important in the context of artistic works, beliefs, philosophy and argument.

Ofcom appreciated that the representation of religious figures was offensive to some people. Their main concern arose from the depictions of figures at the heart of the complainants religious beliefs. However, the show addressed moral issues in the context of a contemporary setting and contained a strong message. The shows effect was to satirise modern fame and the culture of celebrity. The images that caused the most offence were part of a dream sequence serving as a metaphor for the fictional Jerry Springer and his chat show. In Ofcoms view, these were not meant to be faithful or accurate depictions of religious figures, but a product of the lead characters imagination. Even as he lay dying, the fictional Jerry Springer still saw his life through the lens of his confessional show.

The programme as broadcast was not only clearly labelled and signposted, but was preceded by programmes which aimed to put the whole show in context. As always with matters of offence, the context is key. Whilst the show clearly had the potential to offend and indeed the intention to shock it was set in a very clear context as a comment on modern television. The strongest and most offensive language occurred well after the watershed: at 2230 onwards, with the most challenging material after 2300.

The transmission of Jerry Springer: The Opera was not therefore in contravention of Ofcoms Code (see below). Introduction Jerry Springer: The Opera was a televised performance of the West End stage production based on Jerry Springers television show. The US programme is a reality-based talk show which features members of the public discussing their emotional and personal lives. It is highly charged emotionally and regularly features strong language, violent behaviour and revelations of an extreme or shocking nature.

In the Opera, Jerry, the host, is shot at the end of the first act. In the second act, as he is dying, he imagines he is in Hell and forced to present a special show in which Satan wishes to confront figures from the Bible. In the same way as a dysfunctional family in the actual television show might behave, these figures tackle the fundamental issues that divide them. The fictional Springer, dying, reflects on the meaning of life and death and the part he has played in the world. Adam and Eve, Jesus, Mary and God are all introduced as characters in his imagination in this context.

Ofcom received 7941 contacts about the programme before transmission. We replied to these complainants explaining that Ofcom does not preview programmes.

Following the broadcast, 8860 complaints were received by Ofcom - 2849 e-mails, 1747 other contacts and 4264 e-mails from a campaign by the Premier Media Group. The level was unprecedented for Ofcom or any previous broadcasting regulator and appears to have been the first large scale internet campaign to Ofcom on any broadcasting issue.

The complaints included contentions which we would summarise as follows:

We received 210 contacts in support of the programmes broadcast, of whom:

Exceptionally on this occasion, Ofcom decided that it would be appropriate in all the circumstances for Jerry Springer: The Opera to be considered at the highest level within Ofcom, by Ofcoms Content Board. This was because: it had already been considered at the highest level within the BBC; there was a need to avoid delay; the strength of feeling on the part of complainants; the general public interest; the high profile nature of the programme; and the fact that it had provoked strong emotions.

Response

We asked the BBC to respond to the complaints we had received following the transmission of the programme.

The BBC requested that we considered the finding of the BBCs Governors' Programme Complaints Committee (GPCC) as its representation to us. The BBCs Director General had publicly offered his views on this matter prior to transmission, and so the BBC convened a meeting of the GPCC to consider the complaints lodged with the BBC. Ofcom decided to take the GPCC representation as the BBCs statement.

On request, the BBC also supplied us with an edited version of the management statement that was prepared for the GPCC.

In summary the GPCC said that:

The GPPCs representations also specifically referred to our guidance on profanity (which was published in our bulletin Number 13).

Decision

Ofcom had to consider whether Jerry Springer: The Opera contravened the provisions of the exBroadcasting Standards Commission Code on Standards (the Code) with which the BBC has to comply. This Code takes effect under the Communications Act 2003 (the Act) as if it were a code issued by Ofcom (paragraph 43, Schedule 18 of the Act).

Ofcom considered the relevant provisions of the Code (as set out below) taking into account the complaints it had received and in light of its statutory duties under section 319 of the Act, and in particular, in the context of the Standards objectives.

The Act also requires Ofcom - to the extent it appears relevant - to apply standards regarding harm and offence in a manner that best guarantees an appropriate level of freedom of expression.

Ofcom considered the relevant sections of the Code as follows:

Section 7 Scheduling. The Code states that: The composition of audiences of open access channels changes throughout the day, and the content of broadcasts reflects this. At certain times, parents will want to be confident that their children can watch or listen to programmes without the risk of being exposed to disturbing material. At other times, there will be more challenging material.

The programme started one hour after the 2100 watershed. The strongest material was broadcast after 2300. Some complainants clearly did not expect this type of programme to be shown by BBC2. However while there may have been different audience expectations of the kind of material to be found on BBC2, Ofcom recognises that the service was created as an alternative to mainstream offerings found on BBC1.

Conclusion: The programme did not contravene this section of the Code.

Sections 23 and 24 Informing and Warning. The Code states that Broadcasters have a clear duty to give accurate information about the nature and content of programmes in order to allow the audience to make an informed choice.

BBC2 gave clear pre-transmission warnings about the content of the programme. It also clearly prepared the audience for what was coming up, by contextualising the material and explaining the background to the Opera. The likely strength of the material was also clear from the pre-programme publicity and surrounding controversy, although some of it was exaggerated.

Conclusion: The programme did not contravene these sections of the Code.

Sections 26 and 27 Respect and Dignity. The Code states that challenging and deliberately flouting the boundaries of taste in drama and comedy is a time-honoured tradition. Although these programmes have a special freedom, this does not give them unlimited licence to be cruel or to humiliate individuals or groups gratuitously.

Ofcom recognises that a great number of complainants felt that the Opera denigrated the Christian religion. Complainants clearly felt that the programme mocked their strongly held beliefs.

However, in Ofcoms view, serious thought had been given to the material, its production and its transmission. The subject of the Opera was The Jerry Springer Show and the society it reflects. The show was created as a caricature of modern television. Importantly, in Ofcoms view the Opera did not gratuitously humiliate individuals or any groups and in particular the Christian community. Its target was television and fame.

Conclusion: The programme did not contravene these sections of the Code.

Sections 36-38 and 40 Swearing and Offensive Language. The Code states that, Where the language can be justified, the majority of the audience favours the use of a later transmission time rather than editing...

As stated above, the programme was appropriately scheduled well after the watershed (as required by the Code) and the strongest language was transmitted after 2230. However, the Opera as broadcast also pointed up the absurdities of excessive swearing in many of the songs and exchanges rendering them on occasions meaningless and ridiculous. The most extreme language was directed at the character of Satan. This was a programme that satirised modern day confessional shows where such language is common place. The Opera was a parody of such programming and as such, the language was to be expected and could be understood in such a context.

Furthermore, as stated above, the information and warnings available to any potential viewer should have given sufficient indication of the likely content of the programme.

Conclusion: The programme did not contravene these sections of the Code.

Sections 43-45 Offences against Religious Sensibilities. The Code states that Although religions should not be exempt from (the) critical scrutiny...particular care should be taken when referring to religion in entertainment.

Many complainants accused the BBC of committing the crime of blasphemy. However, criminal law is not a matter for Ofcom but for the courts. Ofcom is not required to determine whether the BBC committed blasphemy, but whether, in this case, the provisions of the Code had been contravened.

In assessing these complaints and in line with our statutory duties, Ofcom has sought to achieve the appropriate balance between, on the one hand the standards set in the Code (ex-BSC Code on Standards) and the need to apply those standards to give adequate protection from harmful and offensive material, and on the other hand the need, as appropriate, to guarantee freedom of expression. Freedom of expression is particularly important in the context of artistic works, beliefs, philosophy and argument.

Ofcom appreciated that the representation of religious figures was offensive to some people. Their main concern arose from the depictions of figures at the heart of the complainants religious beliefs.

In considering offence against religious sensibilities, Ofcom took into account the clear context of the Opera. The fictional Jerry Springer lay dying in a delusional state. As he hallucinated, this character was asked to pitch Jesus against the Devil in his own confessional talk show. This dream sequence was emphasised by the fact that the same actors, who played guests on his show in the first act played the characters in the second act. What resulted was a cartoon, full of grotesque images, which challenged the audiences views about morality and the human condition. The production made clear that all the characters in the second act were the product of the fictional Springers imagination: his concepts of Satan, God, Jesus and the others and modelled on the guests in his show.

In addition to this was the blatant use of The Jerry Springer Show format. The characters throughout behaved as people do on the show, using strong language and violence in a highly emotional manner. In light of this, Ofcom did not believe that the characters represented were, in the context of this piece, conveyed as faithful or accurate representations of religious figures, but were characterisations of the shows participants.

Some complainants commented on the fact that Christianity was the subject of the programme rather than another religion. However, the Code does not prohibit broadcasters from choosing to feature any faith in programming what is important is the manner in which it is treated. (The BBC stated that it would broadcast a programme raising similar issues relating to another religion and it was therefore not being discriminatory.) It is not within Ofcoms remit to record a contravention of the Code on the basis that Christianity, as opposed to another faith, was the subject of Jerry Springer: The Opera. In considering freedom of expression, Ofcom recognises the UKs long standing tradition of satirising political and religious figures and celebrities. Ofcom must consider each programme on its merits.

Conclusion: The programme did not contravene these sections of the Code.

On balance, taking the full range of views into account, set against the provisions of the Code and other considerations listed above, Ofcom concluded that the broadcast of Jerry Springer: The Opera was not in contravention of the Code.

The programme did not contravene the Code