Special Hearings — Media Hearings — 1997-09-15

<UNKNOWN>: Thank you very much.  Now as you know what we are looking at is really the role of the SABC during our mandate period which as you know is 1960 to 1993, have you prepared a presentation that you want to make on that?  If so, then I am going to ask you to do that and once you have done that I would have some questions and I am quite sure some of my colleagues would have questions as well.

LOUIS RAUBENHEIMER: No I haven't prepared a fullscale presentation, what I  would like to do as introduction to our discussion is just to outline some of the editorial guidelines within which we functioned at that time and then I think we should carry on with your questions. If required from me I would very much like to submit a written submission to the Committee, I'll do it.

<UNKNOWN>: Very well, I suggest that you carry on and give us that sort of introduction and then we will take it from there.

LOUIS RAUBENHEIMER: Thank you.  This is unfortunately where the Afrikaans will start because these documents that I collected are in Afrikaans at the moment and I couldn't trace the English versions, unfortunately.  I think it is important as an introduction to this discussion to give an indication of what the policy framework was within which I myself and my colleagues functioned under those circumstances and I would like to read it to you, policy guidelines which were on three different levels.    Firstly the provisions of the broadcasting policy of 1986 two quotations there read as follows:    "That the Corporation will broadcast nothing that will disturb the peace of the good order which will endanger the safety of South Africa and its people; which will undermine the economy and the country's international position; promote revolutionary objectives or directly or indirectly lead to transgressions of the law."  Secondly,    "That the Corporation will be on the outlook for revolutionary strategy with unrest and violence to create an atmosphere for revolution.  It does so without being a propaganda instrument for revolution or propaganda".Thus far the 1986 policy.  Then the broader framework subscribed to by the Board of the SABC within which we functioned on a next tier or level.  I would perhaps say that we should at the head of the daily guidelines read the following.      "The maintenance and promotion of public order and the process of gradual adaptation in a peaceful manner to economic and social demands of the time; the counteracting of the revolutionary assault on the country and its peoples; and thirdly, the reconciliation among races and other interest groups as the only long term solution for a country which is currently torn apart".  Then I would say that on the next tier of policy which we dealt with on a daily basis was the point of view of comment for and against certain matters.  The editorial policy of comments or "Kommentaar " as the programme was called was outspoken against the following which I will give to you in English.    "It took a stand against sanctions and the disinvestment campaign; destabilisation of education and in particular black education; violence and terrorism as political instruments for any group inside or outside the country; communism and socialism as political or economic policies; nationalisation of any business that could hamper the creation of welfare and employment opportunities".  Simultaneously "Kommentaar" expressed itself in favour of the following matters, it's in English.    "The creation of a democratic constitution providing for the rights of all groups in the multi-cultural South African society; the free market economy and the creation of work opportunities; improvement of education and educational opportunities for all South Africans; economic development of all sectors and groups; national reconciliation and initiatives that could contribute to it; structured negotiations between all representative leaders in South Africa; and national reconstruction through the elimination of under-development in social and economic development status".  That in broad terms Mr Chair, sketches the policy framework within which we were functioning at the time.  If you would allow me the opportunity at a later stage I would like to read a few more quotations to you from the last year or two of the existence of the "Kommentaar"  division and of the comment, editorial comment programmes of the SABC, which in March 1993 was terminated at my recommendation.  Thank you.

<UNKNOWN>: Can I perhaps just by way of introducing the discussion quote  to you from material, submissions that were placed before us which reflects another view about the SABC and then ask you to comment on that.  The first quote comes from a summary around the SABC that was placed before us by the Freedom of Expression Institute and I am just quoting one sentence from there.  It says -    "There is no doubt that by manipulating the news, blandly denying allegations, suppressing here, adding there, disinforming and one should lying and cheating, the SABC on both radio and TV managed to brainwash a substantial section of the white South African community, public, into believing the government's version of affairs and even supporting its policies and practices".That's the one view that was placed before us.   Another view is taken from a submission that was made to the Steyn Commission of Inquiry.  It says -    "The South African Broadcasting has not fulfilled its responsibility to the South African community particularly with the introduction of its television service in 1976 by failing to investigate social and political issues vital to the future survival of South Africa and by implementing policy measures designed to either ensure that this kind of programme is not produced at all or ensuring that if the issue is given coverage only certain aspects of the issue are presented.  The South African Broadcasting Corporation has misled the Republic of South Africa.  It is  misrepresented the South African situation to the community and it has exercised its propaganda monopoly to achieve this result".  Now as you will appreciate those are two very strong views that are put with regard to the role of the SABC,  what was your experience, how did you  experience the process in view of this sort of comment  that is made?

LOUIS RAUBENHEIMER: Mr Chair as you have justly stated those comments represent very strong points of view and it is difficult for me, on behalf of the whole of the SABC,  because reference is made to more than just the news service, there are references to the whole of the SABC.   Reference is also made to more than just those divisions for which I was responsible.  It is  therefore very difficult for me to comment on those statements and to reply to them except to say that it sounds to me like quite untested testimony.  I would be prepared to deal with that for which I was responsible, for the actuality programmes and the editorial comments and the news background talks, those I would be prepared to subject to intense studies who would be interested in doing so.  The intention with background talks and editorial comments was to give a well-considered point of view of the SABC as a national broadcaster under those circumstances which would then attempt to make a constructive contribution to the development and the reconciliation process in the country.  As a consequence you will probably, not in the news background and the comments for which I was responsible, see any strong points of view which had not been considered very well  and had not been able to consider the arguments in favour or against certain issues.   I would, therefore, like to deny that that type of point of view,  manipulating the news, lying and cheating, applied to those areas for which I was responsible.