MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY: SABC apologised — the digital platforms never have to

A recent ruling showcases what voluntary media accountability entails. Unlike large digital platforms, South African national radio station SAfm has been ordered to publicly apologize for broadcasting false claims. This occurred after a single complaint by a social justice activist to an organization most people are familiar with but unaware of its role.

South Africa's media self-regulatory bodies, the Broadcasting Complaints Commission of South Africa (BCCSA) and the Press Council, are independent and significantly underfunded. Their importance cannot be overstated.

In the case of SAfm's episode of The National Pulse on June 3, activist Christopher Rutledge lodged a complaint against the station. The BCCSA upheld the complaint after anti-immigrant organization March and March's representative, Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma, was given a right of reply by SAfm. Ngobese-Zuma made unsubstantiated claims about foreign nationals, including involvement in serious crime, setting up military bases, smuggling explosives, and paying off police officers.

The SABC's presenters did not challenge these claims, and the BCCSA rejected a fine, deeming an apology more appropriate given the context of xenophobic violence and other negative consequences in South Africa.

The ruling emphasizes that attributing a factual claim to a guest does not exempt a broadcaster from its responsibility to verify the source and accuracy of the information. BCCSA commissioner, advocate Ben Winks, warned about the growing issue of disinformation and the need for broadcast media to remain vigilant. The BCCSA's ruling stresses that broadcasters should question whether an opinion presented as fact is indeed factual and, if it is opinion, what evidence supports it.