The controversial heart of the Broadcasting Amendment Bill was largely ignored at this week’s parliamentary hearings, which were dominated by sectional grievances and discussions on patriotism.
Complaints against the SABC included its failure to reflect all South Africa’s official languages and cultural diversity, the ”Americanisation of the airwaves”, limited programming for deaf viewers and the misrepresentation of trade unions.
Language organisations that made submissions this week, including the Pan South African Language Board, were invited by the African National Congress in response to concerns that 70% of broadcasts are in English.
Largely escaping scrutiny were provisions that sparked fierce controversy but remain in the Bill. These require vetting of the SABC’s news, language and programming policies by Mini- ster of Communications Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri; ”accurate, accountable and fair reporting in order to advance the national and public interest”; and a ministerial say on appointments to two newly created management boards.
Among the few who discussed these issues was the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa, which maintained the minister could not regulate content under current laws. If she were to approve policies it was not clear where anyone complaining about breaches of programming policies would direct their grievances.
Fears were, however, raised that the SABC would be turned into a state broadcaster ahead of the 2004 national elections. Nkenke Kekana, the committee’s chairperson, repeatedly asserted that the ANC guaranteed the broadcaster’s independence.
A submission by the Media Institute of Southern Africa (Misa) suggesting the Bill was oppressive angered ANC MPs. ”The integrity of the ruling party cannot be questioned,” one declared.
Misa’s Tusi Fokane said his group rejected the clauses that tampered with the SABC’s independence. ANC perceptions that it was not getting appropriate media coverage — and that media groups were racist — belonged in another forum, he argued.
His colleague Raymond Louw said newspapers such as the Rand Daily Mail pursued the ”public interest” rather than the ”national interest”, which the government at that time defined as apartheid.
Kekana shot back that apartheid was fundamentally undemocratic. Public opinion could not supersede the national interest in a democracy and journalists or media groups could not regard themselves above the national interest. This was the electorate’s mandate, while the public interest was at best a collection of public opinions.
One change to the Bill is already on the cards: the minister will no longer have authority over the establishment of two regional language channels. These will be SABC subsidiaries licensed by the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa.
The Congress of South African Trade Unions told the committee it would march to SABC offices countrywide on Heritage Day to protest against bias.