Complaint
The programme, originally broadcast in 1967, included an extended sketch entitled βYoung Horne with a Manβ (parodying the title of the 1950 film βYoung Man with a Hornβ, and telling the story of a young white man who aspired to be a jazz musician).Μύ A listener complained that the portrayal of 1920s black jazz musicians by white actors using comically exaggerated accents was likely to be offensive to many, and rendered the material inappropriate for re-broadcasting.Μύ The ECU considered the complaint in relation to the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔβs guidelines on Harm and Offence, with particular reference to those dealing with portrayal, which say ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ output may reflect, but should not perpetuate, the prejudice that exists in society, and the guidelines on Re-use, Reversioning and Permanent Availability, which say:ΜύΜύ
When archive content would not normally be broadcast by the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ today because standards or attitudes have changed, there may be reasons to make it available now including if it is of historical or cultural interest or if it is otherwise editorially justified in the public interest. However, the content should be appropriately scheduled and/or signposted.
Μύ
Outcome
The ECU noted that Round the Horne was widely regarded as a comedy classic and had recently been voted best radio comedy of all time in a Radio Times poll of experts.Μύ This provided strong editorial justification for re-broadcasting it on Radio 4 Extra, which is well established as an archive-based service, for the most part broadcasting material as it was originally heard.Μύ In the ECUβs judgement, it was the stereotypes often encountered in biopics of the era which were the target of the sketchβs humour, and the use of exaggerated accents (for white southern characters as well as black ones) would have been more likely, in the programmeβs original context, to undercut prejudice than to perpetuate it.Μύ However, the ECU recognised that the portrayal of the black characters by white actors was outdated and, in todayβs context, potentially offensive.Μύ While it did not agree that it was simply inappropriate to re-broadcast the material, it accepted that, as recommended by the guidelines on Re-use, Reversioning and Permanent Availability, it should have been accompanied by appropriate signposting, giving context and a clear indication of what listeners could expect.Μύ
The ECU therefore agreed that the broadcast had been in breach of the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔβs editorial standards, but took account of the fact that the listener had already received a reply from the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ apologising for the lack of appropriate signposting and that the editorial management of ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ Radio were clear that the material in question should not be further broadcast without such contextualisation.Μύ In the ECUβs judgement, this sufficed to resolve the issue of complaint.
Resolved