South Africa seems to have forgotten why we have a public broadcaster.
Love it or hate it, the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) is not just another radio or television station. It is part of the glue that holds the country together and gives South Africa an identity.
I have been quick to criticise the SABC in the past – both recent and distant, but I would certainly not call for doing away with it.
These thoughts are prompted by the current debate over how to save the SABC, including making staff cuts. Arguments I read in the newspapers and on social media are usually concerned about money – how to make more, to pay for the existing operation. Rarely do I hear the argument about improving content. Content is what the SABC is about. It is why it exists. It is one of the reasons why we pay taxes – so people in the Groot Karoo and Maputaland have as much access to information as those who live in Sandton.
The SABC is bloated. There are too many chiefs and not enough content creators.
Having said that, let us not forget that the SABC is the source of information for more South Africans than any other radio station, newspaper channel or print publication. The 10 most listened-to radio stations in South Africa are all SABC stations – with more than 30 million listeners between them. That is about the same number as the BBC’s domestic service in the United Kingdom, a country with a similar-sized population. In the US, a country with more than six times the population of South Africa, National Public Radio has an overall listenership of 57 million people.
The most listened-to radio stations in the SABC stable, from the top, are Ukhozi FM, Umhlobo Wenene FM, Metro FM, Lesedi FM, Thobela FM and Motsweding FM. In 7th position is a non-SABC station, followed by three more public radio stations taking up the 8th, 9th and 10th positions – RSG, Ligwalagwala FM and Ikwekwezi FM (Take note, Gautengers how neither 94.7 nor Jacaranda feature in the top 10).
On the TV side, SABC has an audience of more than 30 million as well, with the news in Xhosa being the most-watched TV news programme in the country.
Why are these figures important? They are important because only a public broadcaster will provide services to such a linguistically diverse audience in South Africa. Neither Primedia, Kagiso Media, MultiChoice, or any other commercial media group will provide a similar service. And why not? Because the commercial sector would not find it profitable to do so. Most SABC listeners and viewers do not pay subscription fees, nor do they necessarily live in the big urban areas where most of the commercial stations are found. They listen on simple FM radios, possibly a hi-fi or on a cellphone. Their TV sets capture free-to-air broadcasts using metal aerials or TV-top antennas.
Hence, the SABC is a service. The way pensions and roads, education and healthcare are services. It is not competing with the private sector. It is something else. Something that the private sector does not and will not provide. It places all South Africans on an equal footing as far as access to information and entertainment (when provided properly) is concerned.
Are there problems at the SABC? Of course, there are. In the old days, it was the voice of the ruling party – a service that was carefully designed to divide and rule. Those of us who are old enough to remember will know that South Africa had one of the world’s first cross-country FM radio networks, with services in the main languages of the country. This was not because the National Party wanted to ensure that the average South African had access to a clear radio signal with good content. It was quite the opposite – the National Party wanted to wean listeners away from services broadcasting on shortwave such as the ANC’s Radio Freedom and the BBC World Service and tried to tempt South Africans to listen to “sanitised” news on the superior audio quality of its FM network.
Come 1994 and democracy, a new retooled SABC looked and sounded more like a public broadcaster, but old habits die hard and the new masters returned the SABC to its previous role as state broadcaster – the voice of the ruling party.
The new board is once again trying to put the SABC squarely back on to the public track. A lot of bad management must be undone. I do not envy them. Drastic surgery is necessary to fix the place. It can be done.
I dislike the term “silent majority” but I’m going to use it anyway – the silent majority, the tens of millions of South Africans who rely on the SABC for news and entertainment on a daily basis, want the SABC to survive and prosper, because, for much of that majority, should the SABC cease to exist, it is unlikely that void will be filled.
The SABC should be the go-to place for news, current affairs and entertainment in South Africa as well as for those with an interest in South Africa from beyond our shores (this is a nudge to also fix Channel Africa – make it Africa’s voice to the world). The SABC is not a moneymaker, nor should it be. It is a national treasure. Protect it. But get rid of the parts that prevent it from being a truly public broadcaster. DM
Become an Insider
I clicked on the link to have a chuckle, but you’ve convinced me. Great argument.
Thank you.
I fully agree with you about the importance of the SABC. However, I will still absolutely refuse to pay a TV licence for either my laptop or cell phone, which are vital business tools for me and nothing else!
Encode the broadcasts and let those who want to watch SABC TV pay the fees. Even payment to listen to radio stations is okay. Leave the rest, who do not and do not want to watch or listen to SABC alone.
The same goes for all the so-called ‘kings’ in this country who have to be propped up by tax payers. Have those who recognize and want their ‘kings’ to rule them pay for them.
That’s kinda the direct opposite of how ‘royalty’ has always worked. I agree that monarchies are a dreadful anachronism but the solution isn’t to fund them on a voluntary basis – that won’t work, no matter how you structure it – but to abolish the whole concept altogether. We are supposed to be one of the most progressive modern democracies in the world, and keeping these tinpot ‘royal families’ going really rubs against the grain. It’s time for a constitutional amendment. //
As for encoding SABC transmissions – also, no. Look how long (and how much money it has taken to implement non-encoding STBs. You can surely imagine the ramifications of changing that horse in mid-stream… besides, it would also work exactly counter to the main argument of this article, i.e. that SABC content has to be accessible to everyone, not just those who can scrape together the cost of a subscription. Advertising is the only way to make this work. And when that fails eventually, because on-demand streaming is bound to eat the lunch of all the networks sooner or later, the SABC will fall by the wayside if they haven’t adapted.
TL;DR. The opening paragraphs argue that the debate is over how to make more money vs improving content but then he goes on to admit the SABC is bloated beyond all proportion. So it’s not one *or* the other, it’s both – slash away mercilessly at the rotten, useless administration while adding more creators and fund the whole thing by throwing out the clumsy, outdated colonial concept of ‘licence fees’. Just make it a commercial enterprise – if eTV can do it with two channels entirely funded by advertising then SABC with its vastly greater resources should also be able to, end of discussion.