Read on Twitter
Amidst a fog of selective outrage re #SABC TV licence issue, fueled by clickbait media that would be happy to see SABC closed down & sold off to private sector, the question of how to legitimately fund #PublicBroadcasting in a constitutional democracy has been ignored. A thread
#SABC is not the only public broadcaster in the world using a licence fee mechanism to part-fund public mandate programming. But the statute that governs this - the Broadcasting Act - is 21 years old & needs review. Hence its 1 of the issues posed in govt's draft White Paper. /2
The current law is based on now archaic notion of owning a "TV set" in a world where #SABC audio & AV content is now broadcast & streamed on multiple platforms, incl. analogue FM & TV, DTT, DTH, mobile apps, YouTube, Twitter, FB & on a sports portal http://sabcsportonline.co.za /3
Adding to these platforms, next yr #SABC plans to launch a streaming app, that will incl. all SABC catch-up, linear audio & AV content. IMO a future #PublicBroadcasting levy shoudnt be based on 'how' or 'whether' you consume SABC, but on NB of public broadcasting for democracy /4
Defining a #PublicBroadcasting levy & who should collect it is still up for debate. But those who seek to challenge it legally in SA should have regard to 2018 decision of Germany's highest court which decided that the levy on all households in Germany was constitutional /5
The German court found fee justifiable, noting broad programming options across platforms. Fee was levied "specifically for financing of public service programing that's FUNDAMENTAL TO DEMOCRACY" adding it wasn't relevant whether a person made use of #PublicBroadcasting or not /6
Lastly, the German Court's decision on constitutionality of household levy for public broadcasting was affirmed by @EUCourtPress. Research noted that 99% of people live in a household that has at least 1 device capable of receiving public TV or radio. The same is true in SA. /end
