The recently withdrawn SABC Bill, which communications minister Solly Malatsi withdrew, fails to remedy the funding crisis facing the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC). Media Monitoring Africa director William Bird expressed this opinion following the minister’s withdrawal of the Bill.
Malatsi’s decision has drawn criticism from Khusela Diko, the chairperson of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Communications, who believes the minister has derailed a years-long legislative process. When asked whether Diko’s assertion that Parliament could have improved the SABC Bill is valid, Bird dismissed the argument, claiming the Bill was flawed. He compared transforming the Bill into a viable solution to the impossibility of converting a goat into a Ferrari.
Bird emphasized that the proposed legislation did not address the SABC’s existing funding issues and lacked innovative concepts. He pointed out that the idea of establishing a separate commercial entity within the SABC to assist with funding its public service obligations is not new; it has been the operational structure for the past 27 years.
According to Bird, the SABC relies on revenue generated from public service content intended to be financed by TV licenses, which has not resulted in the anticipated outcomes. He asserted that the SABC must identify the areas requiring public funding and prioritize addressing these priorities. Among the concerns is the significant billing from Sentech, the state-owned broadcasting infrastructure provider—a service many critics suggest should be reconsidered.
Bird also pointed out that the SABC is not the only state broadcaster grappling with financial challenges; examining how other countries manage similar crises could provide valuable insights. SABC chairperson Khathutselo Ramukumba recently noted that governments globally heavily fund public broadcasters to fulfil their mandates, adding that the SABC’s situation is even direr, considering the diverse languages and cultures it serves.
The existing law mandates South Africans to pay a TV license fee while imposing a stringent broadcasting obligation on the SABC that requires it to cater to all population segments and present various audience interests across all official languages. This approach, while essential, incurs high costs and complicates the efforts to attract advertisers, particularly for niche broadcasting segments, leading to financial losses.
The SABC has introduced a household levy as a potential new funding model to address these funding challenges. They proposed that the South African Revenue Service (SARS) and MultiChoice, the owner of DStv, assist in collecting this levy. However, MultiChoice has expressed reluctance, deeming it unreasonable to expect a private competitor to collect revenue on behalf of a government entity.
Furthermore, SABC CEO Nomsa Chabeli has communicated to Parliament the need for interim relief while a new funding framework is being developed. The withdrawn SABC Bill had mandated that the ministers for finance and communications conduct a feasibility study and devise a new funding model within three years of its enactment, which would require state support for the SABC until a new model was in place.
Malatsi retracted the Bill, asserting it did not present a credible funding strategy, a concern echoed by several broadcasting experts, former SABC executives, and media watchdogs. He stated that he exercised his discretionary power to withdraw the Bill following extensive consultations with stakeholders and considering public submissions to Parliament’s communications portfolio committee.
“This approach fails to adequately address the urgent need to stabilize the broadcaster and risks perpetuating an outdated licensing scheme that will not provide the SABC with the resources necessary to fulfil its mandate,” Malatsi remarked.
Originally published in October 2023 by then-communications minister Mondli Gungubele, the draft Bill resulted from years of deliberation and input from key industry players, including the SABC. It aimed to replace the 1999 Broadcasting Act, which is now considered outdated in light of the evolving broadcasting and streaming landscape.
