2588
THE NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE
No. 82

consider that it should get into the field of programme editing
and must look at the overall result. While it might have con-
sidered the programme to have been just as good without
the shot of the couple walking through the bush towards the
camera naked, the context in which the film clip appeared
would not justify the Tribunal upholding the complaint.

The Tribunal does not consider that it is possible to dismiss
all documentaries showing "primitive native people" naked
as being acceptable because they are "primitive native people".
(The use of this expression perhaps reveals more about
Society than it realises.)

The Tribunal is concerned that the Society cannot under-
stand that the circumstances of the film, the context in which
it is shown, and the length or period of display all must be
taken into account in considering the acceptability of the
programme itself.

The Tribunal wishes to emphasise that although it has set
out at length many arguments raised by the Society the prime
influence on its decision must be its viewing of the
programme.

The Tribunal rejects entirely the Society's suggestion that
it necessarily follows that television commercials and all New
Zealand made television programmes may follow some
alleged relaxation of standards brought about by our
"approving" this programme. That is not the situation and
any statement made by the Society to that effect fails to
understand this decision.

It is clear that programme makers have to use great care
in deciding the occasions on which nudity would be per-
mitted on television in New Zealand. We consider in this case
that the Corporation through Television Two took consider-
able care in showing a programme on a subject in which
some delicacy is required in ensuring that steps were taken to
contain realism without offence.

While we, as a Tribunal, may have edited the programme
slightly differently in respect of the final scene, we do not
consider it our task to instruct broadcasters in such matters
in which they rather than we have the technical and profes-
sional skills. It is considered the number of occasions in
which similar sort of films will be shown will be very few
and the Tribunal will have no difficulty in discerning the
objectives of the programme maker by the production itself
and the honesty of purpose or sensational prurient attention
sought in presentation.

Finally, we consider it inappropriate to compare the film
censor's task with that of the television producer. Even less
relevant to television is the way in which such matters are
determined for the press. We have noted but do not intend
to set out in full a number of differences between the cases
submitted to us regarding newspapers including those where
there has been some decision of the Courts applying other
statutes.

One such difference is that the newspaper reader may study
for as long as he or she wishes any photograph displayed in
a newspaper. A television producer can control the period
during which the viewer sees possibly objectionable material;
no such control is possible in newspaper production.

The Tribunal upholds the decision of the Corporation and
declines to find the complaint of the Society justified.

Co-opted Members:

In accordance with section 61 (10) the Tribunal has co-opted
Miss M. A. Ronnie and Mr L. R. Shelton as two persons
whose qualifications or experience were likely, in the opinion
of the Tribunal, to be of assistance to the Tribunal in dealing
with the complaint. They have taken part in the deliberations
of the Tribunal but the decision in accordance with the Act
is that of the permanent members.

Dated this 16th day of August 1979.

For the Tribunal:

B. H. SLANE, Chairman.

Decision No. 929
Reference No.: IND. 14/79
Decision of the Indecent Publications Tribunal

IN THE MATTER of the Indecent Publications Act 1963, and in
the matter of an application by the Comptroller of
Customs in respect of the publications:

1. Title: Playboy's Book of Limericks.
   Author: Clifford Crist.
   Publisher: Castle Books Inc.

2. Title: The World's Best Dirty Jokes.
   Author: Mr "J".
   Publisher: Castle Books Inc.

3. Title: Two Women in Love.
   Author: Roy Volkmann.
   Publisher: Strawberry Hill Publishing Co. Inc.

4. Title: 25 Ways to Better Love Making.
   Author: Roxanne L. Gray.
   Publisher: Marshall Cavendish Publications Ltd.

BEFORE THE INDECENT PUBLICATIONS TRIBUNAL

Messrs L. M. Greig (Chairman), D. M. Wylie, Mrs H. B.
Dick.

Hearing: 5 July 1979.

Appearances: Mr P. E. Leloir for Comptroller of Customs.

Decision

These four books were seized by the Customs Department
on a commercial importation and come before us on disputed
forfeiture.

The first two books are collections of limericks or jokes
which are nearly all of the bawdy or sexual variety. There is
no literary merit or social importance in either book and the
overall effect on each of them is a trivial, tasteless, and
exaggerated emphasis on matters of sex. Each of these books
is indecent.

Two Women In Love is a collection of photographs which
depicts sexual activity between two women. The dominant
effect of the book is an appeal to prurience without any
redeeming feature. This book is indecent.

25 Ways to Better Love Making comprises photographs
and text and deals with sexual techniques. Its presentation is
restrained and sensible and includes an explicit and implicit
assumption that sexual relationships are not merely physical.
As was noted in Decision No. 926 the Tribunal feels that in
light of some change in the standards of community opinion
since the Decisions numbered 432 to 435 in March 1972 a
restriction to age 16 may be more appropriate in this type of
publication.

The Tribunal classifies Playboy's Book of Limericks, Two
Women In Love, and The World's Best Dirty Jokes, as
indecent.

It classifies 25 Ways to Better Love Making as indecent in
the hands of persons under the age of 16 years.

Dated at Wellington this 22nd day of August 1979.

LAURENCE M. GREIG, Chairman.

Decision No. 930
Reference No.: IND. 15/79-16/79
Decision of the Indecent Publications Tribunal

IN THE MATTER of the Indecent Publications Act 1963, and in
the matter of an application by the Comptroller of
Customs in respect of the publications:

1. Title: Big Juicy Jugs, Volume 4, No. 4.
   Publisher: American Art Enterprises Inc.

2. Title: Block Busters, Volume 8, No. 2.
   Publisher: American Art Enterprises Inc.

3. Title: Foxette, Volume 1, No. 2.
   Publisher: T. & T. Publications.

4. Title: T. & T., Volume 1, No. 2.
   Publisher: T. & T. Publications.

5. Title: Sex Objects.
   Author: Eric Kroll.
   Publisher: Addison House.

6. Title: "38-26-34", Volume 16, No. 1.
   Publisher: American Art Enterprises Inc.

7. Title: Busts, Volume 1, No. 3.
   Publisher: American Art Enterprises Inc.

8. Title: Kingsize, Volume 9, No. 4.
   Publisher: American Art Enterprises Inc.

9. Title: Foxette, Volume 1, No. 5.
   Publisher: T. & T. Publications.

10. Title: Body Shop, No. 7.
    Publisher: Love Publishing Co.

BEFORE THE INDECENT PUBLICATIONS TRIBUNAL

Messrs L. M. Greig (Chairman), D. M. Wylie, Mrs H. B.
Dick.

Hearing: 5 July 1979.

Appearances: Mr P. E. Leloir for Comptroller of Customs,
Mr P. H. Thorp for Waverley Publishing Co. Ltd., written
submissions from the Society for the Promotion of Individual
Responsibility (Inc.) authorised by Waverley Publications Co.
Ltd., considered.