The Complainant held the view that the continued broadcast of the programme despite the huge public uproar throughout the years constituted incitement to cause harm. The Respondent presented hate speech arguments and did not focus on the impact of the continued broadcast. Despite having alluded to the corrective interventions the Respondent did not present the results of the previous interventions in order that it could contrast the public view. The Respondent further failed to evidence that its broadcast was sensitive to the psychological harm caused due to prolonged exposure to violence and possible childhood trauma. Thus, the Respondent continued broadcast led to the advocating of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion and which constitutes incitement to cause harm.
CLICK TO VIEW FULL JUDGMENT (13) Mphuthi vs Multichoice Channel 157 Judgment