SABC in the dock...
Public broadcaster or a PR firm for the ANC government? That's the nub of a question facing Icasa today (Friday) when the regulator is scheduled to hear complaints about the SABC's decision to stop broadcasting footage of violent protests against the state, notes Daily News. The effect of the new SABC policy became clear this week when public violence at a level not seen since the dark days of apartheid swept across Tshwane but was given only the most watered down coverage by the public broadcaster. The SABC says it is not ignoring the protest actions and violence in its news bulletins, but refuses to show footage of people becoming violent and vandalising property. ‘It is our duty to report the news. But it is an editorial decision not to show footage of people destroying property. It adds nothing (to the news) and does not take the story further,’ said head of news, Jimi Matthews. According to a Beeld report, he explicitly denied that the decision amounts to censorship. SABC boss Hlaudi Motsoeneng declined to elaborate on the reasons of the ‘editorial decision’ or possible steps against journalists who may decide to go ahead and cover violent protests.
Newspaper reports indicate that at the height of the violence this week SABC viewers were offered only the most basic coverage, notes Daily News. ‘Verwoerd would have been proud,’ Media Monitoring Africa’s William Bird is quoted as saying in Beeld in reference to the shallow coverage of the widespread violence in Tshwane. The SABC was showing footage of Springbok practices while other news outlets were showing Pretoria burning following the ANC’s decision to name former Minister Thoko Didiza as its mayoral candidate for the upcoming elections, Beeld said. Sekoetlane Phamodi, of the S OS Coalition, labelled the SABC’s decision ‘anti-democratic’ and not in line with the broadcaster’s mandate. ‘It is vulgar and deeply disturbing to see how the SABC is turning a blind eye to such protest action.’ Phamodi said more than seven million households see only SABC platforms for the news. Bird said the SABC had delved into its ‘deepest, darkest archives’ for ideas on how to change the public broadcaster into a state broadcaster. ‘It is not just the work of one crazy man. The Minister of Communications and the ruling party support the new policy.’ A report in The Citizen notes most of Tuesday night's prime time bulletin was dedicated to Ministers Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, David Mahlobo and Gauteng Premier David Makhura’s press conference in which they explained that the army would not be deployed to contain the unrest .
Full Beeld report (subscription needed)
The uproar was sparked by an announcement in May by Motsoeneng, who said that the public broadcaster would no longer air content featuring violent protests, especially those targeting government buildings, notes a BDlive report. ‘Continuing to promote them (violent protests) might encourage other communities to do the same … the SABC would not assist these individuals to push their agenda that seeks media attention,’ he said at the time. The SABC has also banned the reading of newspaper headlines on all SABC platforms. There was also an uproar following the canning of the popular SAfm Sunday morning news show, The Editors. A similar Afrikaans programme on RSG, featuring editors and political analysts examing the news of the week is also being sidelined. Media Monitoring Africa argues that the decision to ban the broadcasting of violent protests was unlawful and in clear violation of the Broadcasting Act, the SABC’s licence conditions and its revised editorial policies. The organisation also argues that the decision constituted blatant censorship by the broadcaster, more so in the run-up to the local elections in August.
Lobby group Right2Know has also taken the public broadcaster to task. The group marched to the SABC offices in Johannesburg, Cape Town and Durban this week to hand over a memorandum, demanding the SABC ends ‘self-censorship’ and that Motsoeneng step down. According to another BDlive report, Micah Reddy‚ the media freedom organiser from R2K‚ said the SABC had gone from being a proud public broadcaster to a public relations machine for Luthuli House‚ the headquarters of the ANC. In its memorandum‚ R2K also asked for the SABC to withdraw its revised editorial policy, which‚ according to Reddy‚ will give Motsoeneng‚ the final say on which news should be aired and how. ‘The SABC is a critical institution with the greatest (audience) reach. Millions of South Africans rely on it for information and news. We demand critical news that is fair‚’ said Reddy.
Media Monitoring Africa was challenging the ban because it constituted censorship, Bird is quoted as saying in a City Press report. He said no one knew why the SABC had taken the decision, or what wrong they sought to address – adding that it was unclear what the actual decision was. ‘It should at least be written down, but we are left to rely on a press release. The absence of clarity is likely to not only lead to confusion, but will directly encourage self-censorship and a chilling effect,’ said Bird. SABC spokesperson Kaizer Kganyago reportedly said the broadcaster would not disclose to the media the argument it would put to Icasa over the matter. But he apparently insisted it was not true that the SABC had ‘b anned anything’, nor was it censoring news. Kganyago reportedly said those who complained about the decision not to air footage of the destruction of property were misinterpreting the SABC’s statement. ‘People keep saying that we are banning something, they say we say we are not going to cover violent protest. That is not what we are saying. We are saying the opposite. We are saying we will continue to cover protests. The only thing we are not going to show is the footage of people burning or destroying property,’ City Press quotes him as saying. In an article on the Daily Maverick site, Bird says the warning signs are clear: ‘the very basic tenets of reporting are being deliberately undermined. We need to see these efforts for what they are – efforts to not only return the SABC to an aparthei d-style state broadcaster but also a clear threat to our democracy&rs quo;. He adds: ‘If we can’t trust the SABC to report on an issue of such clear national importance, how do we know critical facts are not being censored from the other key stories they report on?'
The SABC is also being accused of political bias. The DA is considering legal action against the broadcaster after determining that the ANC received disproportionately higher coverage than other political parties. An analysis by the party of recent coverage of the three largest political parties, showed that the ANC received nearly three times more coverage than the DA and four and a half times as much coverage as the EFF, DA federal executive chair James Selfe said, according to a BDlive report. The DA had received a series of ‘feeble excuses’ from the SABC pertaining to the coverage of party events and the timeous flighting of adverts – all of which pointed to ‘preferential treatment’ of the ANC. ‘To this end we contend that the SABC is in contravention of the municipal party elections broadcasts and political advertisements regulations, 2011, which deal with equitable treatment and fairness of political party coverage during an election period,’ Selfe said.
© Daily News
Article disclaimer: While we have made every effort to ensure the accuracy of this article, it is not intended to provide final legal advice as facts and situations will differ from case to case, and therefore specific legal advice should be sought with a lawyer.
