On 15 February 2021, FMF made a submission to the Department of Communications and Digital Technologies on the White Paper on Audio and Audiovisual Content Services Policy Framework which can be read HERE.
Executive summary
There are four issues the Free Market Foundation finds concerning in the draft white paper. The first is that the white paper perpetuates the centralised control of the communications industry, which entrenches incumbent players and restricts competition. The second is that the white paper in many respects unjustifiably infringes on the constitutional rights of South Africans constitutions. The third is that while the white paper proposes to bring about regulatory parity, it in fact makes it more difficult for new players in the market to operate. Fourthly, the Department of Communications and Digital Technologies has resigned itself to the fact that the SABC will never be profitable and thus has included provisions that exempt the SABC from being required to be profitable.
To cure the first defect, the Free Market Foundation recommends that the aim of centralising and regulating spectrum, as well as the expression of individuals and the proliferation of artistic content is an intrusion on the liberties of South Africans that should be abandoned. The need for regulation in spectrum use and acquisition is premised on the scarcity of spectrum, a scarcity caused by interference between two broadcasters who may use the band of another thus interfering with their transmission. This is the logic for exclusive licenses for certain frequency bands granted to corporations at the behest of the state.
In the modern day, however, there are companies like Netflix and other content providers who do not utilise any 'public utility' in the form of spectrum for the provision of their services. The decision, therefore, to also have them regulated under one overarching policy that was mainly motivated by the need to regulate a public utility, is flawed and will stifle innovation in commerce. The additional costs these regulations impose on businesses will simply be passed on to the consumer, thereby leading to more expensive entertainment and undermine the end goal of ensuring wider access to varied entertainment. A deregulatory approach should be adopted.
Furthermore, regulating content providers on platforms like YouTube is highly discouraged. Those who upload content on services like YouTube should be exempt from the regulations on any level, even within the varied analysis of scarcity and size or influence being used, which unfairly penalises growth and success.
To cure the second defect, the Free Market Foundation recommends that the freedom to express oneself, to choose what form and types of expressions one consumes as a dignified human being, be respected. The quota policy that has been in place since 2016 for 'traditional' broadcasters, and which will now be applied to content providers that are included in the expanded definition, ought to be abandoned. Any form of quota, instructing companies what content to produce and in what quantities, is reminiscent of the tyranny of communist states, and even in some respects the Apartheid state, whereby the rights mentioned were not recognised and a 'national identity' was cultivated using state force through centralised control of artistic content.
South Africans can make their own decisions about which content to watch, and if they want to consume American, European, or Asian content only, that it is within their rights. Rather than having new entrants in the market comply with the content quotas, it is recommended that the quotas be done away with altogether. If South Africans demand local content, then there will be producers of it who seek to satisfy that demand, all without any form a government directive.
To cure the third defect, the Free Market Foundation recommends that the objective of regulatory parity sought by the policy be achieved by deregulation. Where one company or sub-sector is subject to a regulation and another is not, repeal that the regulation, rather than passing another one for the unregulated company or sub-sector.To cure the fourth defect, the Free Market Foundation recommends that government require the SABC to be profitable and self-sustaining, or that government privatise the enterprise. The South African taxpayer cannot continue to foot the bill for an organ of entertainment, especially not in these dire economic times.
In general, the Free Market Foundation encourages government to adopt a single policy paradigm for all participants in the broadcasting industry and not drawing arbitrary distinctions that infringe on equality at law. Such a policy must respect the right of ordinary South Africans and broadcasters to decide for themselves what content they create, curate, and/or consume, without any involvement by the state, as the Constitution requires. The vision of the policy to create a so-called 'national identity' by way of regulations must be scrapped entirely from the policy. The centralisation of the industry, which leads to the creation of barriers to entry and oligopolies, should be scrapped. A presumption of 'freedom to broadcast' should be adopted and thus guide whatever regulatory path the department seeks to adopt.
Large parts of the white paper are recommended to be done away with or reconsidered. The industry covered by the policy is integral to realising the constitutional rights of South Africans, and for the economic prosperity of our society. It is crucial that government not further harm this important sector of the economy.