Gayton McKenzie's sports rights vow is populism, wishful thinking

Jan

Jan

Who's the Boss?
Staff member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
13,510
Reaction score
11,157
Location
The Rabbit Hole
Bad news for ending DStv's sports monopoly

If the government wants the SABC to show more live sports events of national importance on free-to-air television, it must first fix the public broadcaster's dire financial situation or foot the bill for the broadcasting rights to such content itself.

That is according to seasoned broadcasting journalist Thinus Ferreira, responding to explosive comments from the recently appointed sports minister Gayton McKenzie.
 
Sounds like Thinus likes those free lunches in Randburg. Also, anti-siphoning laws exist (especially in Australia). No one said take away rights from Multichoice but there needs to be an environment where FTA broadcasters can show live games in the public's interest. If rights are bought years in advance there's no reason for Multichoice to come up a month before a tournament and place FTA rights to tender (this is obviously deliberate). Take the fiasco if the T20 world cup final the SABC only reached an agreement at the 11th hour and were only allowed to broadcast the match on analogue and digital terrestrial TV. In a space where linear tv is losing its relevancy why not allow to cater to all platforms?
 
Jan said:
Bad news for ending DStv's sports monopoly

If the government wants the SABC to show more live sports events of national importance on free-to-air television, it must first fix the public broadcaster's dire financial situation or foot the bill for the broadcasting rights to such content itself.

That is according to seasoned broadcasting journalist Thinus Ferreira, responding to explosive comments from the recently appointed sports minister Gayton McKenzie.
Click to expand...
If McKenzie or other government official wants to fix sport in SA, instead of getting populist brownie points, he would do something about the abysmal resources at many state (township & rural) schools.

Mind you, if the government has not eliminated pit toilets after thirty years, decent facilities and teachers trained to be coaches is probably a bit of a stretch.
 
Colin42 said:
If McKenzie or other government official wants to fix sport in SA, instead of getting populist brownie points, he would do something about the abysmal resources at many state (township & rural) schools.

Mind you, if the government has not eliminated pit toilets after thirty years, decent facilities and teachers trained to be coaches is probably a bit of a stretch.
Click to expand...
WTF has this got to do with sport broadcasting?

quit this random rambling
 
He's introducing a red herring. Also I hope he's not suggesting a monopoly is needed to fund sports?
 
Major Boredom said:
Gayton is right. The legislation is there


Not quite sure if it is exactly as Gayton says though

View attachment 1749195
Click to expand...
It is but Icasa first has to come up with a list of events and sports. They've avoided this specifically because they don't want to upset MC's apple cart. Then the regulations only deal with FTA rights and they still have to determine payment but this part hasn't been an issue before.
 
Swa said:
It is but Icasa first has to come up with a list of events and sports. They've avoided this specifically because they don't want to upset MC's apple cart. Then the regulations only deal with FTA rights and they still have to determine payment but this part hasn't been an issue before.
Click to expand...
Isn't the list already in the regulations? And it's not for free in any event ...
 
I have basically stopped watching live sports unless at a stadium.

I will occasionally watched a boxing match thats shown on Youtube through official channels.

Sports have become to much of an hassle and too expensive to watch.

Watching sports on a TV is a non event in my house and I expect many more households.
 
Major Boredom said:
Gayton is right. The legislation is there


Not quite sure if it is exactly as Gayton says though

View attachment 1749195
Click to expand...

It does when taken into account the ECA:

Section 60 (1) of the ECA governs the interface between subscription broadcasting services and the public interest insofar as the broadcasting of national sporting events is concerned. Section 60(1) expressly provides as follows:
“Subscription broadcasting services may not acquire exclusive rights that prevent or hinder the free-to-air broadcasting of national sporting events, as identified in the public interest from time to time, by the Authority, after consultation with the Minister and the Minister of Sport and in accordance with the regulations prescribed by the Authority”
Click to expand...


I think they are playing in dangerous waters, I am reading in the submission of the amendments to the bill:

  1. 3.3. SARU was of the view that the Government should not be involved in the regulation of sports and that the draft regulations would have the effect of infringing upon constitutionally-protected rights.
  2. 3.4. Netball SA argued that section 60(1) is an obligation on the subscription licensees and that the Authority does not have a mandate to regulate sporting bodies. It further contended that due to exposure granted to Netball by Multichoice, Netball SA had seen a growth in its revenue.
Click to expand...

It is tantamount to an expropriation without compensation

https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/202103/44372gen163.pdf

There is actually a really easy solution to the problem, and that is that the state should put in regulations and funding to these various organisations, in return there are limited free to air broadcast rights that must be made available.
Other than that, it would be better to just let DSTV rot and die.

I would prefer that Gayton put is efforts into getting race out of sport tbh.

Showing national sport is a far better investment for the public of South Africa than pumping the swill that both them and "local artists" produce into the airwaves.
 
rh1 said:
I have basically stopped watching live sports unless at a stadium.
Click to expand...
I prefer watching on tv or not at all. I hate stadiums unless its for a legacy music artist that sings and has a premium live experience. And those days are gone.

That said my sport is pretty much limits to the odd big game here and there. I stop giving a fck when i had to watch the Sunshine D tournament between the DHL team and the MTN team at the Sunlight Liquid Stadium

And when i watch i happily pirate a stream because i watch the National team, which belongs to everybody
 
  • Like
Reactions: rh1
quovadis said:
Isn't the list already in the regulations? And it's not for free in any event ...
Click to expand...
The regulations say that Icasa can compile a list of sports and events of national interest that get preferential treatment. You're right there's nothing about it being free. I'm not aware of the regulations themselves giving a list.

The issue came in when Icasa also included sports that people are generally interested in watching nationally but which are not of national interest and it never went anywhere after that.
 
Swa said:
The regulations say that Icasa can compile a list of sports and events of national interest that get preferential treatment. You're right there's nothing about it being free. I'm not aware of the regulations themselves giving a list.

The issue came in when Icasa also included sports that people are generally interested in watching nationally but which are not of national interest and it never went anywhere after that.
Click to expand...
IMG_6639.jpeg
IMG_6640.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter