The South African Broadcasting Corporation has been mandated to broadcast an apology following the ruling from a broadcasting regulator that stated SAFM inadequately managed an interview with Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma, the leader of March and March.
This ruling by the Broadcasting Complaints Commission arose from an edition of The National Pulse aired on SAFM on June 3. During the episode, Ngobese-Zuma presented various grave factual assertions regarding foreign nationals in South Africa.
Remarks made by Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma
The interview, which Ashraf Garda hosted, followed a segment with Daniel Steyn, deputy editor at GroundUp, who disputed several assertions by March and March related to immigration. Ngobese-Zuma was afforded an opportunity to respond.
During her discussion, she claimed that 60% of serious crimes occurring in Gauteng were linked to foreign nationals, alleged that foreign-funded groups were procuring weapons, suggested that bombs and explosives were being smuggled into the nation, asserted the existence of foreign military bases within South Africa, and claimed that some foreign nationals evaded prosecution through bribery of law enforcement officials.
Rutledge, the social justice activist, submitted his complaint by asserting that these statements transcended mere political opinions, qualifying instead as factual claims concerning crime rates, corruption, national security, and civil society organizations. He argued that SAFM did not compel Ngobese-Zuma to corroborate any of her allegations nor inform listeners that the statements lacked verification.
SABC found in violation of the broadcasting code
In defense, the SABC contended that Ngobese-Zuma’s remarks represented her personal opinion and indicated that Steyn’s previous interview had already afforded audiences a contrasting viewpoint, ensuring overall balance.
Rutledge countered this argument, asserting that simply attributing serious claims to a guest does not satisfy a broadcaster’s responsibilities as outlined by the Free-to-Air Code. He was emphatic that his complaint focused not on providing a platform to controversial figures, but on the need for appropriate examination of the factual basis surrounding the claims.
Commissioner Advocate Ben Winks evaluated each specific statement made by Ngobese-Zuma and concluded that the SABC breached the code on all fronts. He noted that the assertions had been delivered as confirmed truths, rather than expressed as personal opinions or unverified hypotheses.
Winks emphasized the serious implications of the statements, cautioning that presenting such claims as facts could incite contempt and discrimination towards immigrants residing in South Africa.
“The broadcaster was not required to silence the guest. It was required to interrogate the factual foundation of what was being presented to its audience,” Rutledge said.
Winks also highlighted the urgent issue of widespread misinformation, particularly as elections approach, insisting that broadcasters bear a significant responsibility.
As part of the consequences, the SABC must air a summary of the commission’s findings during the same program along with an on-air apology acknowledging the violation. The corporation indicated it would leverage this ruling to enhance its editorial procedures, including directives aimed at presenters involved in discussions on sensitive current affairs.
