No evidence of SABC blacklisting

[neio]

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=qw1160645402235B212

Yeah right

 

[xtermin8or]

which media organisation does not censor certain analysts by choosing to use others, this is just normal, I can't understand why the fuss over the SABC doing it

 

[chiskop]

The fuss is because, according to Anton Harber's column in yesterday's BusDay, are blacklisting but some of there management are lying about it.

 

[xtermin8or]

I actually meant, why the fuss was made initially, not after Harber says he spoke to someone who said they read the report

 

[kilo39]

Bit like ICASA finding no evidence of telkom price gouging.

hello, hello.........................<snore>

 

[Debbie]

xt makes a good point.

We also forget the role money plays in who gets a voice in the media and who doesn't.

 

[neio]

which media organisation does not censor certain analysts by choosing to use others, this is just normal, I can't understand why the fuss over the SABC doing it

Because the SABC is a public broadcaster and as such receives funding from the goverment.

 

[Debbie]

The SABC is not controlled by government alone. The market is it's own force too.

 

[Skeptik]

which media organisation does not censor certain analysts by choosing to use others, this is just normal, I can't understand why the fuss over the SABC doing it

Business Day columnist Anton Harber wrote on Wednesday the inquiry revealed that Zikalala had broken the broadcaster's own code of conduct.

He said the report on the outcome of the probe cited at least eight incidents where Zikalala transgressed.

It concluded he did so by not using certain commentators and analysts for reasons that were not "objectively justifiable".

The inquiry also found that Zikalala made a misleading statement when denying the existence of an editorial blacklist.

Well Snuki is a shameless government stooge if you ask me.

He was shunned big-time when he attended the journalism awards last year. His fellow journalists obviously know exactly what he is up to.

 

[Syndyre]

which media organisation does not censor certain analysts by choosing to use others, this is just normal, I can't understand why the fuss over the SABC doing it

Not sure exactly what you mean but for practical reasons obviously they can't use all columnists or analysts. I think the issue was that certain columnists were not being used because the SABC executive didn't agree with their political point of view, which is a different issue entirely.

 

[chiskop]

Many of the SABC head-honchos have described the organisation's journalistic role to be that of a guidedog* rather than a watchdog. If that is their stated policy, that is fine - and I think that an argument can be made that it is appropriate given South Africa's situation as a recently liberated country and the SABC's position as a mixed public|private broadcaster.

And xterm, I agree that all broadcasters have their own biases - and I'd rather have that acknowledged than to pretand that it didn't exist.

I think though, that the SABC (or certain employees) have been caught out in a lie here, and that is the issue for me.

When this hit the newspapers the SABC issued a statement saying "No Blacklist", and a spokesperson went on John Perlman's show to say "No Blacklist" - when in fact a number of commentators were being excluded for various reasons.

And, whether or not you agree with the SABC policies, that should be enough for some action to be taken.

_____________________________________________
* looked for a reference for this one, but all I could find where complaints to ASA about some Nandos ad from years ago

 

[icyrus]

Perhaps someone more enlightened could help me out here: why is it that the SABC gathers money from the public via mandatory TV licenses and yet still sticks adverts in as many places as possible? Is this standard practice for public broadcasters around the world?

 

[Jongi]

I think BBC does it. I assume that anything with BBC in it means that it falls under their public broadcaster umbrella.

I suppose it also goes to how the media in general behave. In that time slots are either 30 minutes or derivatives thereof yet the actual content is not. Eg an episode of your favourite series is about 45min long. Meaning they have been created with advertising thought of. Of course the flip side is that instead of having things start on the hour or half hour they should start when they last program ends. I would be very much in favour of that.

 

[chiskop]

Perhaps someone more enlightened could help me out here: why is it that the SABC gathers money from the public via mandatory TV licenses and yet still sticks adverts in as many places as possible? Is this standard practice for public broadcasters around the world?

Mixed funding is not unusual - broadcasters in Canada, much of Europe, New Zealand and elsewhere use both public money (license fees or govt subsidies) and private money (advertising).

 

[The_Right_Honourable_Brit]

The commission’s 78-page report, of which the Mail & Guardian has a copy, is damning. It confirms the existence of an arbitrary blacklist of outside commentators who should not be consulted and says there is a climate of fear in the broadcaster’s newsrooms. It is scathing about the arbitrary decision-making, the iron-fist rule and the lack of editorial knowledge of the news and current affairs managing director Snuki Zikalala.

The report says Zikalala “appears to intervene at a micro-level inappropriate to his level of management … in a seemingly ad hoc and inconsistent manner … and then belatedly attempted to develop policy guidelines in regard to these practices.

The effect of this management style is that rather than voluntary [and presumably occasional] ‘upward referral’ as outlined in the editorial policies, there is a downward micro-management which can only impact negatively on morale, initiative and an appropriate sense of ownership [by journalists].”

“The board, ” recommends the report, “should take close cognisance of the concerns about the particular management style of Dr Zikalala as outlined in this report, particularly regarding problems of communication and the inappropriately narrow interpretation of the SABC’s mandate.”

Read in conjunction with the evidence of Zikalala’s exclusion of commentators, it is clear that urgent action is recommended.

Yet on Thursday both the board and the SABC’s group chief executive, Dali Mpofu, said they had “full confidence” in Zikalala, meaning that he will not lose his job or face other serious sanction.

Read more: http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?articleid=286556&area=/insight/insight__national/

 

[icyrus]

Mixed funding is not unusual - broadcasters in Canada, much of Europe, New Zealand and elsewhere use both public money (license fees or govt subsidies) and private money (advertising).

Given that, is it common for said broadcasters to make their books available to the public so that they can see where there money goes? What is SABC's policy on this?

 

[Jongi]

The SABC most likely only produces accounts for parliament. I assume it is a public document and as such under the Information Act one should be able to get the info.

Those are assumptions. The reality might well be different.

 

[Jongi]

Is this what you were looking for?

http://www.sabc.co.za/portal/site/corporate/menuitem.2fff23841a0a6ee48891f2e75401aeb9/

 

[reech]

From where I'm looking it's pertty simple really - a state broadcaster demonstrating partisan support. Long live the banana republic.

Anyone care to post a copy of the report?

 

[Jongi]

From where I'm looking it's pertty simple really - a state broadcaster demonstrating partisan support. Long live the banana republic.

Anyone care to post a copy of the report?

Post #15 of this thread?