The South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) was reprimanded on Wednesday for broadcasting an unbalanced report creating the impression that only the security forces committed atrocities during the struggle against apartheid.
”[T]he tribunal is of the view that one-sided impressions were created in the programme, which are to the detriment of the security force officers,” the Broadcasting Complaints Commission of South Africa (BCCSA) said in a statement.
”This does not mean that we are of the opinion that these officers were innocent of any atrocities. They [or some of them] admitted to such atrocities.”
The programme also created the impression that the security officers tried to prevent their victims from giving evidence against them at the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the tribunal found.
The complaint, brought by the Foundation for Equality, concerned the first of two programmes commemorating the tenth anniversary of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, broadcast on Special Assignment on November 18 2008.
The tribunal found the SABC had contravened section 36 of the broadcasting code of conduct, pertaining to controversial issues of public importance.
The section stipulates that in presenting such issues, licensees need to make ”reasonable efforts” to fairly present opposing points of view, either in the same programme or soon after in another programme.
The foundation complained that the programme disregarded acts of terror committed by the African National Congress or other organisations.
It submitted that information about these incidents was public knowledge and could easily have been verified by the SABC.
The SABC countered that the foundation had ”misinterpreted and misquoted” the programme and the broadcaster maintained its belief that the episode was fair, balanced and factual.
The BCCSA tribunal found that although images were shown of black perpetrators of violence, these were ”fleeting”, had no voice-overs and included portrayals of Inkatha Freedom Party followers, who ”were not usually associated with acts of terrorism”.
Young people born after 1994 would not be familiar with the Winnie Mandela United Football Club or know of the conviction of Winnie Madikizela-Mandela, former wife of president Nelson Mandela, for assault and as an accessory after the fact in the death of Stompie Seipei.
”The same young person would also not understand the extent of the connection between Inkatha and the atrocities associated with the armed struggle,” the tribunal said.
There was also no proof backing the impression created by the programme that former Vlakplaas security police base commander Dirk Coetzee had been prevented from giving evidence before the TRC by the security force officers.
In finding that one-sided impressions were created in the programme, the tribunal said it did not intend to interfere with the editorial prerogative of the presenter.
”The presenter is free to take a particular angle or line and to emphasise aspects that he or she considers to be more important than others.
”However, when the presenter is dealing with controversial issues of public importance, he or she should treat all parties involved in the issue fairly, and see to it that balance is obtained in presenting different viewpoints.
”If this is not done, the broadcast can deteriorate into propaganda, a situation that cannot be allowed in any democracy.”
The tribunal said although it had found a contravention of the code of conduct it did not regard this as so serious that the SABC deserved more than a reprimand. — Sapa