+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Date post: 13-Dec-2015
Category:
Upload: heather-phillips
View: 218 times
Download: 3 times
Share this document with a friend
30
Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006
Transcript
Page 1: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Media and policy issues: South Africa case study

PGDip 2006

Page 2: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

External media policy External media policy contextcontext

Pre and post Pre and post apartheid policyapartheid policy

Key moment – 1993Key moment – 1993 Three tier broadcast Three tier broadcast

system (mixed system (mixed paradigms) paradigms)

Policy theory v actual Policy theory v actual practice.practice.

Can we fly?Can we fly?

Page 3: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

1. LAW and POLICY SA Constitution = qualified free

expression, free enterprise. Law on Hate Speech. Law on Film & Publications. Defamation & copyright law.

Constitutional guarantee of an independent regulator.

What policy is embedded in all this?

Page 4: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Where is SA govt policy on media Where is SA govt policy on media made and/or implemented?made and/or implemented?

parties parties parliamentparliament governmentgovernment IcasaIcasa industry (BCCSA, Ombudsman)industry (BCCSA, Ombudsman) Film and Publications BoardFilm and Publications Board Media Devt and Diversity AgencyMedia Devt and Diversity Agency

Page 5: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

PlayersPlayers in SA media policy in SA media policy

Actors within govt, parliament, civil Actors within govt, parliament, civil service, parties, Icasaservice, parties, Icasa

SABC BoardSABC Board Business (eg. Convergence Bill)Business (eg. Convergence Bill) Civil Society groupsCivil Society groups Courts, Competition Commission. Courts, Competition Commission. Note: conflicts between sites and Note: conflicts between sites and

also between playersalso between players

Page 6: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

2. Then and now Contrasting media landscape today, with

that of the past Relating the different shapes (form, and

content) to policy.

Page 7: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Golding - Policy focuses on:

INDUSTRY STRUCTURE

MEDIA

CONTENTS

Page 8: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Golding: Policy ethos

interventionist

inte

rventio

ni

st

liberal

liber

al

INDUSTRY STRUCTURE

MEDIA

CONTENTS

Page 9: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Golding: Policy systems

Authoritarian

Libertarian

interventionist

inte

rventio

ni

st

liberal

liber

al

INDUSTRY STRUCTURE

MEDIA

CONTENTS

Page 10: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Golding: Policy systems

Authoritarian Free market + strong

state

Regulatory Libertarian

interventionist

inte

rventio

ni

st

liberal

liber

al

INDUSTRY STRUCTURE

MEDIA

CONTENTS Note: label

Page 11: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Apartheid: authoritarianApartheid: authoritarian

Values & interests:Values & interests:– racist, anti-democraticracist, anti-democratic

= State control (& law):= State control (& law):– Broadcast near monopolyBroadcast near monopoly– Print hemmed in by lawsPrint hemmed in by laws

Aim: media as tool for apartheidAim: media as tool for apartheid No democ / freedom / equalityNo democ / freedom / equality

Page 12: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Key moment: 1993 Key moment: 1993

Three groups (cf Horwitz):Three groups (cf Horwitz):– ANC (new state)ANC (new state)– NP (old state, pro-market)NP (old state, pro-market)– Civil society (pro-participation)Civil society (pro-participation)

ANC and NP compromise: ANC and NP compromise: – ok, neither will control bdcastingok, neither will control bdcasting..

Civil society writes 1993 IBA Act. Civil society writes 1993 IBA Act.

Page 13: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

ANC policyANC policy De Klerk liberalised 1990De Klerk liberalised 1990 ANC 1992 policy:ANC 1992 policy:

– pluralism essential to pluralism essential to democracy (neo-liberal). democracy (neo-liberal).

– Freedom to be Freedom to be complemented by complemented by conscious effort to push conscious effort to push debate (social-democratic).debate (social-democratic).

– Access for all Access for all (participatory). (participatory).

– Access to infoAccess to info

Page 14: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

New factors at work …New factors at work … Freedom of ExpressionFreedom of Expression Deregulation, LiberalisationDeregulation, Liberalisation Privatisation, CommercialisationPrivatisation, Commercialisation Concentration and ownershipConcentration and ownership PBSPBS Language and social issuesLanguage and social issues ConvergenceConvergence

Page 15: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Post-apartheid media policyPost-apartheid media policy Values & interests:Values & interests:

– non-racial, BEE, democraticnon-racial, BEE, democratic State liberalised:State liberalised:

– Broadcast pluralism (Broadcast pluralism (neo-liberalneo-liberal))– Print is free (Print is free (liberalliberal) ) – Subsidies by MDDA (Subsidies by MDDA (grassrootsgrassroots))

Aim: media as mixed sector Aim: media as mixed sector providing:providing:– Public service + access + make moneyPublic service + access + make money– (functionalist paradigm = serve society(functionalist paradigm = serve society))

Page 16: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

New bdcast landscape 94: New bdcast landscape 94:

Regulator:Regulator:– IBA (broadcast)IBA (broadcast)– Satra (telecoms)Satra (telecoms)– Merger: IcasaMerger: Icasa

Regulator “Triple enquiry issues”:Regulator “Triple enquiry issues”:– local contentlocal content– funding public broadcasterfunding public broadcaster– cross & foreign ownershipcross & foreign ownership

Page 17: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Power & participatory issues:Power & participatory issues:

Who finally decides policyWho finally decides policy::– Icasa, govt, SABC board, parliament, public…?Icasa, govt, SABC board, parliament, public…?

Eg. SABC’s internal policies issue: Minister & Icasa Eg. SABC’s internal policies issue: Minister & Icasa lost out. lost out.

Who makes policy? Compare: Who makes policy? Compare: – Very participative group: 1993 Act Very participative group: 1993 Act – IBA became centre of policy makingIBA became centre of policy making– Gvt clawed back: Gvt clawed back: – Stakeholders group (ngos, unions, business): Stakeholders group (ngos, unions, business):

green & white paper: 1997 Actgreen & white paper: 1997 Act

– 2003 convergence bill – less consultation: only 2003 convergence bill – less consultation: only industry.industry.

Page 18: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Regulator & policyRegulator & policy Who makes policy?Who makes policy? Horwitz (2): shift to representative governanceHorwitz (2): shift to representative governance How does Icasa account? (And avoid scandals.)How does Icasa account? (And avoid scandals.) 2005/5: Minister wants to appoint councillors; 2005/5: Minister wants to appoint councillors;

President sends Act back to parliament President sends Act back to parliament because this would be unconstitutional.because this would be unconstitutional.

CompromiseCompromise: gvt gives broad policy directives, : gvt gives broad policy directives, transparent, parliament. transparent, parliament.

Page 19: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

3. Media landscape

Page 20: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Newspapers – 1993 Newspapers – 1993 regulationsregulations

– No person who controls a No person who controls a newspaper which has 20 percent newspaper which has 20 percent or more of the newspaper or more of the newspaper circulation in a specific area, may circulation in a specific area, may control a radio station in the same control a radio station in the same or a substantially overlapping or a substantially overlapping area. area.

– A 20 percent shareholding in a A 20 percent shareholding in a radio or television station is radio or television station is deemed to be control.deemed to be control.

Page 21: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Three tier broadcastThree tier broadcast

1. Community broadcasting:1. Community broadcasting: - 130 new stations licensed- 130 new stations licensed

2. Public broadcasting:2. Public broadcasting: - a cut-back SABC- a cut-back SABC

3. Private broadcasting:3. Private broadcasting:– privatised 6 stations privatised 6 stations – greenfields stationsgreenfields stations

Page 22: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

ComplementaritiesComplementarities

TIEROwnership Purpose Obligs Funding

CommunityPBSCommercial

FEATURES

Page 23: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

ComplementaritiesComplementarities

TIEROwnership Purpose Obligs Funding

Community communityPBS stateCommercial private

FEATURES

Page 24: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

ComplementaritiesComplementarities

TIEROwnership Purpose Obligs Funding

Community community accessPBS state public

serviceCommercial private growth

FEATURES

Page 25: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

ComplementaritiesComplementarities

TIEROwnership Purpose Obligs Funding

Community community access mediumPBS state public

servicehigh

Commercial private growth low

FEATURES

Page 26: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

ComplementaritiesComplementarities

TIEROwnership Purpose Obligs Funding

Community community access medium volunteer, donors, ads

PBS state public service

high nat adverts, licenses, sponsors

Commercial private growth low adverts, sponsors

FEATURES

Page 27: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Theory vs Practice (chaos?) Funding:

all chasing advertising, competing. Access:

all providing some access SABC: (White Paper, Bdcst Law.)

Pbs and Cpbs – the difference?, Two new television stations – funding? Debate over re-licensing.

Page 28: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

More complexitiesMore complexities

Convergence:Convergence:– ““Triple play”: tv, Triple play”: tv,

telephones, Nettelephones, Net– global aspect (undersea global aspect (undersea

cable): whose policy?cable): whose policy?– Policy objectives blurPolicy objectives blur

Commerce vs govt Commerce vs govt policy objectivespolicy objectives

Page 29: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Summing upSumming up

Current SA players in media policyCurrent SA players in media policy Pre and post apartheid policyPre and post apartheid policy Key moment – 1993Key moment – 1993 Three tier system (mixed Three tier system (mixed

paradigms) paradigms) Policy theory v actual practice.Policy theory v actual practice.

Page 30: Media and policy issues: South Africa case study PGDip 2006.

Thank you


Recommended