In a complaint from the Chair of SATRA against the SABC, it was argued that the SABC:
(a) had misconstrued the Gobodo Report by stating that this report had confirmed some damning allegations of mismanagement against the Chairperson of SATRA;
(b) had not granted the Chair a reasonable opportunity to air his view
The BCCSA held that by stating that the Gobodo Report confirmed or revealed damning allegations, the SABC had transgressed the Code which requires that a broadcaster should distinguish clearly between fact and allegation. By employing terms such as “confirmed allegations” or “revealed allegations”, a substantial number of viewers were confused into believing that the Gobodo Report had in fact made a negative finding on the allegations.
In reality, Gobodo Incorporated was only commissioned to inquire into how certain confidential matters had been leaked to the press. The report merely noted the allegations and did nothing more than that. The complaint was accordingly upheld on this count.
As to reasonable opportunity it was, however, held that there was insufficient evidence that the SABC had not taken reasonable steps to reach the Chairperson. The final report on 15 August in any case made it clear that the Chair had denied the allegations and that Gobodo Incorporated had not been commissioned to inquire into the truth of the allegations. This complaint was not upheld.
The Commission directed the SABC to broadcast a clarifying statement on all its TV news services.