CASE NO: 33/2014 – SCHWARTZ VS SABC3 – PUBLIC IMPORTANCE

Complaints that biased and incorrect views were broadcast by the Respondent in regard to the Israel-Gaza conflict were not upheld on the ground that a contrary view by the Israeli Ambassador and a representative from the Jewish Board of Deputies was also broadcast. In any case, where foreign matters are broadcast, the higher level of [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:35+00:00 December 18th, 2015|SABC 3|Comments Off on CASE NO: 33/2014 – SCHWARTZ VS SABC3 – PUBLIC IMPORTANCE

CASE NO: 07/2014 – DE WET VS SABC3 – AGE RESTRICTION

An age advisory was not added to a music video broadcast at 09:55 on a Saturday in January 2014. The SABC conceded that an age advisory of PG 10 should have been provided at the commencement of the programme for ninety seconds as prescribed. The SABC, however, argued extenuating circumstances relating to the absence of [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:45+00:00 December 17th, 2015|SABC 3|Comments Off on CASE NO: 07/2014 – DE WET VS SABC3 – AGE RESTRICTION

CASE NO: 06/2015 – NAIDOO VS SABC3- RELIGION

A film contained a scene where a young lady, in a dream, saw Jesus coming off the Cross and making sexual suggestions to her. Scene saved by the fact that it did not amount to hate speech based on religion. Complaint not upheld. [2015] JOL 33178 (BCCSA) CLICK TO VIEW FULL JUDGMENT [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:49+00:00 December 17th, 2015|SABC 3|Comments Off on CASE NO: 06/2015 – NAIDOO VS SABC3- RELIGION

CASE NO: 05/2015 – ABEL VS SABC3 – NEWS

Following a complaint that the 18h30 SABC3 TV English news bulletin did not include excerpts of that day’s reply by the leader of the Parliamentary Opposition in regard to the State of the Nation address of the President, the Tribunal held as follows:  The SABC decides on the contents of its own news bulletins. That accords [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:49+00:00 December 17th, 2015|SABC 3|Comments Off on CASE NO: 05/2015 – ABEL VS SABC3 – NEWS

CASE NO: 02/2014 – FORBES VS SABC3 – COMPETITION

A complaint was received regarding a viewer competition that offered a prize to viewers who sent an SMS to a certain number. Later on during the programme, it emerged, however, that only clients of a certain bank, i.e. Nedbank, stood a chance of winning the prize. The Complainant is not a client of Nedbank.  The [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:51+00:00 December 15th, 2015|SABC 3|Comments Off on CASE NO: 02/2014 – FORBES VS SABC3 – COMPETITION

CASE NO: 05/2013 – MABASA VS SABC3 – NEWS

Clause 11(9) of the Broadcasting Code for Free-to-Air Broadcasters provides as follows:       (9)        Broadcasting service licensees must not include explicit or graphic language     related to news of destruction, accidents or sexual violence which could disturb      children or sensitive audiences, except where it is in the public interest to include such [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:52+00:00 May 22nd, 2015|SABC 3|Comments Off on CASE NO: 05/2013 – MABASA VS SABC3 – NEWS

CASE NO: 11/2013 – KRUGER VS SABC3 – RELIGION

Broadcast of Top Gear programme on SABC3, in which the Top Gear team arrived at the Sea of Galilee and made light-hearted references to certain sayings of Jesus Christ. The Tribunal held that, although the references were likely to have been offensive to many Christian viewers, the standard of “advocacy of hatred based on religion [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:54+00:00 May 22nd, 2015|SABC 3|Comments Off on CASE NO: 11/2013 – KRUGER VS SABC3 – RELIGION

CASE NO: 14/2013 – PILLAY VS SABC3 – CHILDREN

A complaint was received concerning a film broadcast during the early afternoon with a 10PG. The Tribunal held that the classification “Parental Guidance” means that parents are advised to be present while their children under ten watch a film. Although there is no nudity in the scenes complained about, there are compromising scenes of sexual [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:55+00:00 May 22nd, 2015|SABC 3|Comments Off on CASE NO: 14/2013 – PILLAY VS SABC3 – CHILDREN

CASE NO: 21/2013 – GLICKMAN VS SABC3 – RIGHT TO REPLY

The complaint was that the one-sided view broadcast by the SABC, wherein the policy of Israel vis-à-vis the Palestinians was equated with apartheid, amounted to a contravention of the Broadcasting Code. The Tribunal held as follows: No reasonable viewer of the news was likely to have understood the item as attempting to reflect balance. In [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:56+00:00 May 22nd, 2015|SABC 3|Comments Off on CASE NO: 21/2013 – GLICKMAN VS SABC3 – RIGHT TO REPLY

CASE NO: 31/2013 – UNIVERSAL CHURCH OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD IN SOUTH AFRICA (“THE CHURCH”) VS SABC3 – DEFAMATION

A complaint was received from the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God in South Africa ( “the Church”) that its reputation had been impaired owing to the use of visual inserts in the regular SABC3 discussion and investigation programme, Special Assignment. The purpose of the programme was to report on churches and clergy who [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:47:00+00:00 May 21st, 2015|SABC 3|Comments Off on CASE NO: 31/2013 – UNIVERSAL CHURCH OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD IN SOUTH AFRICA (“THE CHURCH”) VS SABC3 – DEFAMATION