Comments

News Shorts

TV BIZ

ICASA rules that Multichoice and other pay-TV operators may only carry SABC channels “subject to commercially negotiable terms” i.e. MultiChoice needs to pay to carry the SABC channels, which they haven't done for 13 years, yet they pay for the other channels on DStv.

Goku
29 Jun 2021 12:35

Mmm Bt can someone enlighten me with simple English

TVSA Team
29 Jun 2021 15:51

Goku, yip, it's an eye-boggling mouthful.

So mind-boggling we deleted it by mistake! We've republished their statement in the SABC section to avoid being too wordy here.

A link >> SABC's response to ICASA Must Carry ruling

This is our interpration of it:

ICASA has a Must Carry clause that says MultiChoice must carry the SABC channels on DStv because of it being a public broadcaster.

DStv's been doing this but haven't been paying the SABC a fee for the channels.

They pay for the other channels on DStv though e.g. BBC Lifestyle, MTV, National Geographic etc. - they have commercial agreements with them.

The SABC argues that DStv's benefitting from the SABC channels, just as they do with the channels they pay for, and should therefore pay for the SABC channels too.

They say the channels are an asset to DStv's line-up and because they're not paying for them, the public are essentially footing the bill to boost MultiChoice's business because the SABC channels are supported by government grants and TV licenses.

This new clause by ICASA says that MultiChoice and the SABC have to enter into a commercial aggreement whereby MultiChoice pays a fee for the channels.

The clause is still in draft, so it hasn't been officially changed yet and MutliChoice have asked for it to be put on hold "pending policy certainty". Not sure what that means.

Ultimately it comes down to the value of the SABC channels on DStv.

Would you still get DStv if there were no SABC channels on it?