Last week producers and television executives from all over the world converged on Johannesburg to view programmes and swap opinions about the state of their industry. They found the SABC, the conference host, in a state of public meltdown. First the head of news was sacked. Next the chief executive was sacked. I was told that these sackings were the consequence of a power struggle within the ANC’s Mbeki and Zuma factions.
I work for the BBC and I suppose that South Africans must be tired of being told how to run their affairs by outsiders. Many South Africans reacted defensively when I tried to talk about the situation the SABC was facing. There was nothing new about political interference in broadcasting, they said. Under apartheid and, more recently, since the institution of democracy, broadcasting had always been used for propagandistic purposes.
The fate of the SABC seems important to me for many reasons. Public broadcasters all over the world are in crisis, suffering from lack of funds and lacking confidence in what they do. The BBC, great auntie of them all, was called to account by the Blair government for inaccurate reporting related to the Iraqi war. It, too, is experiencing deep and painful cuts.
But this is different to the situation in which the SABC finds itself. There is no justification for a public system of broadcasting in which the government can interfere. Censorship, whether explicit or covert, destroys any degree of trust. It is impossible for censored or half-censored media to represent truthfully what is going on. If the SABC is subjected to interference of this kind, people will abandon it, sidelining it in their own minds as an irrelevancy.
But there is another equally distressing aspect of the SABC crisis. I first came to South Africa in 2000. The purpose of my visit was to find ways of collaborating with South African filmmakers and the SABC to make documentaries about a country in which I had a passionate interest. It seemed that the world could be made to share in the fate of South Africa, one of the newest and most interesting democracies. If democracy failed in South Africa, where would that leave the rest of us?
The first project in which the BBC became involved was Steps for the Future. Extraordinary care and effort went into producing 38 films chronicling the spread of HIV and Aids in Southern Africa. The films are wonderful — many of them witty, all of them poignant. This story has just been retold in a book (Steps by Steps published by Jacana Media). The experience convinced me that it should be possible to make films as a collaborative effort, working globally. Indeed films about places like South Africa need no longer be made by visiting middle-aged BBC men, invariably white and usually attired in safari suits.
Just as important at that wonderful moment was the attitude of the SABC. A dynamic newly appointed head of documentaries proved willing to encourage the venture and make sure that the films were seen by as many South Africans as possible. (They were also broadcast all over the world in more than 25 countries).
Fast forward seven years and you can see the difference. Why Democracy? — a series of 10 documentaries and 15 short films — was commissioned globally and produced from Cape Town. The films were aired by 48 broadcasters and accompanied by a website run by young people from all over the world. One of the films, Taxi to the Darkside, won an Oscar; and the Chinese film, Please Vote for Me, has already won 10 prizes.
But I am sure that few readers of this paper saw many of the films. This was because they received negligible marketing from the SABC and were put out in slots where people were unlikely to find them. Having invested in them, the SABC barely bothered to acknowledge their existence.
Three years ago at the Sithengi market in Cape Town I sat on a panel with three SABC executives. They described the process by which decisions about whom to commission were made. They were quite explicit about their desire to use black rather than white producers.
I understand why such views are held. But I am convinced that the SABC’s implementation of them is deeply flawed. As I understand it, BEE was conceived as a way of bringing previously disadvantaged people into the economy. BEE was most probably designed to create a diversity of voices, but its purpose was surely not to diminish the enormous range of voices — black, white, Indian, Xhosa, Sesotho — to be found in the contemporary democracy of South Africa.
At the same time what South African producers call, perhaps euphemistically, ‘operational deficiencies†affect producers whatever their colour. And these, combined with political interference, have a negative effect on the quality and independence of programmes.
I do not know one white producer who does not have stories to tell about the extreme difficulty in getting work at the SABC. But black producers face similar problems. Also there appears to be a concerted policy of refusing to work with certain companies and treating others as favourites. This is a problem faced by most public broadcasters — and the BBC has received its share of criticism — but when it is combined with the unresolved question of colour it surely becomes much worse.
There is nothing wrong with instituting rigorous training programmes for black producers. This should be among the greatest priorities of the SABC. But that is not the same as deciding you don’t want to work with whites or people who don’t happen to share your political views.
Producers who are not employed by the SABC are either frightened of speaking in public about these matters or are ready to leave the industry. One of the most talented producers I know, who happens to be black, said it was the laziness and lack of ambition of the SABC that upset him most.
One of the best things about globalisation is that it forces you to apply the same or similar standards to everyone. There is really no room left for excuses. We are now able to know exactly how Chinese media are brutally censored — and how the government is able, from time to time, to give the impression that its control is only fitful. Commercial censorship — the suppression of truths about companies or products — is everywhere, but it can be documented easily. Sometimes I feel the BBC is over assiduous in publicising its shortcomings, but it does own up to them. I didn’t notice much coverage on the SABC of its own problems.
I hope the ANC will have the courage to get its fingers out of the SABC pie. If it fails to do this, more meddling will surely cause people not just to despise the SABC, but also the ANC.
But I have another wish: that the SABC will rediscover its role as patron and enabler of all that is best in South African culture. The world has a lot to learn about what happens here. Broadcasting is a way in which South Africans can collaborate with the rest of the world. We can learn to talk to one another about our futures. Come to think of it, we can learn to talk to one another.
Nick Fraser has written this piece in his personal capacity