CASE NUMBER: 06/2005 – VAN DER WALT VS etv – UNFAIR REPORTING

The Registrar of the Commission received a complaint in regard to an issue of the respondent’s regular news commentary programme 3^rd Degree on the 12^th October 2004. The complainant, as an expert in the security field, was clearly disgusted with the standard of the debate and information conveyed to the public about explosions. In fact, the Tribunal agrees that the programme was lacking in several respects. It would seem to have dealt with particularly problematic matters in a sensational manner and not have introduced independent expert testimony, which was necessary for the debate. A spokesperson for Sasol provided some information, but it was not coherent as a result of poor sound reproduction and technical production, which would not seem to have been done with due expertise. Although sympathy for families of the people who have lost their husbands is fitting for such a programme, this would seem to have become the main ingredient of the programme. In spite of these shortcomings, the programme did attempt to provide balance by including comments from a Sasol representative. However, the programme would, in the view of the Tribunal, not have been taken seriously by the likely viewer of the programme : the accent and over-emphasis on emotion, tended to negate its value as a news commentary programme. The bias was so obvious and the information provided so uneven that it will be hard to judge the programme to have been unequivocally unfair within the scope thereof. Within these parameters, it was as fair as it could get. The informed viewer is likely to have not taken the programme seriously and the ordinary viewer would either switch to another programme or be interested only in the emotional side of the programme, almost as if it were a Soap. Had poor quality been the test, the Tribunal would probably have found in favour of the complainant. This is, however, not the test. The Complaint is not upheld.