Complaints were received about the use of “white trash” by a presenter on Highveld Stereo. He radioreferred to people living in Brakpan. Highveld Stereo is well known for its outspoken comments by some of its presenters and this should not be stifled. A society without humour is likely to become stagnant and depressive and the radio assists in keeping listeners not only informed but also entertained. Our racially divided past makes it necessary that this past be discussed in the public interest. To ignore it would be reminiscent of an ostrich which places its head in the sand. Section 36 of the Constitution, however, permits that fundamental right may be limited to the extent that the limitation is reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom, taking into account all relevant factors. The repetitive reference by the presenter to white trash and white noise justifies the inference that the words were not merely used in jest or as a mere throwaway phrase. In any case, whatever, his intention might have been, the “trash” aspect is dominant. People of Brakpan are likened to trash, which must be degrading in the extreme to a substantial number of listeners in Brakpan. The test is, of course, an objective one measured against the standard of reasonableness in our society. This standard is also defined by the ideals of the Constitution. Non-racialism is stated to be a founding provision in section one of the Constitution. The conclusion of the Tribunal is that the repetitive use of white trash in the insert amounts to an unreasonable and shocking intrusion of the right of dignity of White people living in Brakpan. No joke can save it and no tolerant attitudes of listeners excuses this flagrant abuse of freedom of expression. It goes further than being merely offensive, it hits at one of the very roots of our democratic society: dignity and non-racialism. There are no compelling circumstances which would justify the broadcast. It was also not in then public interest. 

The complaints are upheld.

[2005] JOL 22676 (BCTSA)

CLICK TO VIEW FULL JUDGMENT    Case-No-53-2005