Source: http://bccsa.co.za/author/bbbccsssa_/
Timestamp: 2017-04-25 10:32:38
Document Index: 668467214

Matched Legal Cases: ['CASE NO: 17', 'CASE NO: 17', 'CASE NO: 23', 'CASE NO: 23', 'CASE NO: 24', 'CASE NO: 24', 'CASE NO: 22', 'CASE NO: 22']

User-MD – Broadcasting Complaints Commission of South Africa
Click here to download	About User-MD	This author has not yet filled in any details.So far User-MD has created 167 blog entries.	CASE NO: 17/2015 – NATHANE-TAULELA VS e.tv – IDENTITY OF CHILDREN
Complaint about a broadcast of Berea-Hillbrow Home of Hope, a children's home where children in need of care and protection are being cared for. In the broadcast, which was intended to make people aware of the plight of the children, the faces of some of the children were shown on television. The Complainant, quoting section [...]	By User-MD|
2017-01-27T11:46:31+00:00	December 22nd, 2015|E-TV|Comments Off on CASE NO: 17/2015 – NATHANE-TAULELA VS e.tv – IDENTITY OF CHILDREN	Read More	ADJUDICATION NO: 25/A/2015 – BOTHA VS e.tv – VIOLENCE
The complaint was about a broadcast of “Rhythm City” in which a woman was strangled in the context of extensive verbal abuse. The scene depicted torture in a domestic violence context. The broadcast allegedly violated the code in that it would have been harmful or disturbing to children and it was broadcast when large numbers [...]	By User-MD|
2017-01-27T11:46:31+00:00	December 22nd, 2015|E-TV|Comments Off on ADJUDICATION NO: 25/A/2015 – BOTHA VS e.tv – VIOLENCE	Read More	ADJUDICATION NO: 28/A/2015 – BELTER VS MULTICHOICE CHANNEL 301 – VIOLENCE
DSTV: Cartoon Network – The Regular Show – 20h00 – 31 October 2015. Content unsuitable for family viewing, younger children. CLICK TO VIEW FULL ADJUDICATION By User-MD|
2017-01-27T11:46:31+00:00	December 22nd, 2015|Multichoice|Comments Off on ADJUDICATION NO: 28/A/2015 – BELTER VS MULTICHOICE CHANNEL 301 – VIOLENCE	Read More	ADJUDICATION NO: 15/A/2014 – DE KOCK, POWELS, LACKEY, MOYES, DOORDUIN & DE BEER VS SABC- 5FM – CHILDREN
Complaint about offensive and unacceptable language unsuitable for children. [2014 JOL 32083 (BCCSA) CLICK TO VIEW FULL JUDGMENT By User-MD|
2017-01-27T11:46:31+00:00	December 22nd, 2015|SABC Radio|Comments Off on ADJUDICATION NO: 15/A/2014 – DE KOCK, POWELS, LACKEY, MOYES, DOORDUIN & DE BEER VS SABC- 5FM – CHILDREN	Read More	ADJUDICATION NO: 17/A/2014 – KHOURY VS SABC – 5FM – CHILDREN
Inappropriate sexual references at a time when children might be listening. [2014] JOL 32450 (BCCSA) CLICK TO VIEW FULL ADJUDICATION By User-MD|
2015-12-22T11:02:39+00:00	December 22nd, 2015|SABC Radio|Comments Off on ADJUDICATION NO: 17/A/2014 – KHOURY VS SABC – 5FM – CHILDREN	Read More	ADJUDICATION NO: 22/A/2014 – KRIEL AND LOMBARD	VS SABC2 – HATE SPEECH
2017-01-27T11:46:32+00:00	December 22nd, 2015|SABC 2|Comments Off on ADJUDICATION NO: 22/A/2014 – KRIEL AND LOMBARD	VS SABC2 – HATE SPEECH	Read More	ADJUDICATION NO: 21/A/2014 – HAGSPIHL VS SABC – 5FM – CHILDREN
Complaint that the contents of a song by a local band are unsuitable for children, promotes illegal use of drugs, abuse of alcohol and promiscuity. [2014] JOL 32660 (BCCSA) CLICK TO VIEW FULL ADJUDICATION By User-MD|
2017-01-27T11:46:32+00:00	December 22nd, 2015|SABC Radio|Comments Off on ADJUDICATION NO: 21/A/2014 – HAGSPIHL VS SABC – 5FM – CHILDREN	Read More	CASE NO: 23/2014 – REYNEKE, MOODLEY AND VAN HEERDEN-94.7 HIGHVELD STEREO-COMMENT
Complaints were received arguing that profane language used by a radio anchor during a broadcast at 06:20 on 9 June 2014 was unacceptable and in conflict with the Broadcasting Code. The Tribunal held that although the words used were in severely questionable taste, they did not amount to hate speech, which requires advocacy and incitement. [...]	By User-MD|
2017-01-27T11:46:32+00:00	December 20th, 2015|947|Comments Off on CASE NO: 23/2014 – REYNEKE, MOODLEY AND VAN HEERDEN-94.7 HIGHVELD STEREO-COMMENT	Read More	CASE NO: 24/2014 – MIDGLEY VS 567 CAPE TALK – COMMENT
A complaint was received about the Harley Carnes US Report, which is broadcast most weekdays with Kieno Kammies on Cape Talk. The Complainant argued that the report was one-sided in the sense that it provided a “Republican” view of the administration of President Obama. He referred to four broadcasts. Held: Clause 11, the news clause, [...]	By User-MD|
2017-01-27T11:46:32+00:00	December 20th, 2015|567 Cape Talk|Comments Off on CASE NO: 24/2014 – MIDGLEY VS 567 CAPE TALK – COMMENT	Read More	CASE NO: 22/2014 – RODIONOV VS 702 – COMMENTARY ON ELECTIONS
Complainant argued that a short commentary by a visiting researcher from the Ukraine on the elections in Crimea was one-sided and ill-informed. The Tribunal held that the Complainant’s assertion regarding the researcher’s claim that the European Union’s electoral commission had not been allowed to monitor the elections, was incorrect. It was, however, as stated by [...]	By User-MD|
2017-01-27T11:46:33+00:00	December 20th, 2015|702|Comments Off on CASE NO: 22/2014 – RODIONOV VS 702 – COMMENTARY ON ELECTIONS	Read More	1