What amounts to self-censorship by SA’s public broadcaster was reported in this article by the M & G on-line “SABC ‘censors’ Numsa-Zuma reporting“, banning reporting of Numsa’s rejection of the ANC.
This is not the first time SABC management and, presumably, the ANC, have had a hand in SABC editorial content, having also banned reporting of the booing of president Zuma at the Mandela memorial. In fact, political influence in SABC broadcast content goes way back to the days of the Nationalist Party’s control of the broadcaster, a tradition ably carried on by their successors, the ANC. A brief look at the SABC’s history clearly shows the extent of this interference.
As the primary communicator in SA the SABC needs protection from all political interference. The Direct Democracy Forum communications policy outline’s how the DDF will protect the public broadcaster by affording it the protection of Chapter 9 of the constitution. See how DDF policies will help you.
Support the DDF Follow the DDF on Twitter.
The buck stops at the ballot box.
South Africa will be 70% cloudless with sunny skies regardless of the storms in our back yards, the hail, the snow, the storm-clouds on the horizon, the odd tsunami and hurricane and floods, droughts and assorted mayhem. This according to acting chief operations officer at the SABC, Hlaudi Motsoeneng.
Where do the ANC get their puppets from? Next they will be believing their own propaganda.
The Direct Democracy Forum promise a hands-off policy regarding its relations with the news industry. The news and media industries will be expected to reflect the truth, not as the DDF hope for it but as it is, warts and all. If we live in denial about our problems how will we ever fix them?
Look at DDF Communications Policies and DDF Security Policies to gauge or intentions.
The buck ends at the ballot box.
The Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000 (or PAIA; Act No. 2 of 2000) is a South African freedom of information law intended to impose compliance with section 32 of SA’s Constitution. It allows access to any information held by the State or by private bodies required for the exercise and protection of any rights.
Why is it, then, that requests for information in accordance with the act are so often met with silence, obfuscation and delaying tactics that force committed appellants to court in order to obtain compliance? This behaviour is so endemic and systemic that clearly government can only be trying to impose a general acceptance of secrecy regarding its affairs so when it acts unlawfully or unwisely it’s misbehaviour is simply buried amongst all other of its dealings. In short, civilians must simply “put up and shut up”. What SA’s government and politicians get up to is simply not any of our business. This tale, “finding-truth-in-a-culture-of-secrecy” expresses the frustration experienced by anyone trying to obtain information from government, particularly about contentious events, such as but not limited to Nkandlagate.
The Direct Democracy Forum have news for anyone taking advantage of this sort of behaviour. As a body which respects constitutional compliance, the DDF find this sort of behaviour unacceptable from government institutions and undertake to enforce strict compliance with the constitution by all branches of government and to prosecute recalcitrants to the full extent of the law. That should bring about a sea-change in bureaucratic attitudes and probably also in bureaucratic behaviour.
The buck stops at the ballot box.