The hardline approach and haste by regulatory authority Icasa (Independent Communications Authority of South Africa) to shut down pay TV platform StarSat are almost inexplicable.
It can also be described as ham-fisted. Earlier this month, a delegation led by President Cyril Ramaphosa tried to persuade the Chinese government and businesses for greater investment in South Africa while at the same time, Icasa seems hell-bent on shutting down StarSat in which China’s StarTimes has a $25 million investment. It’s a case of the left hand not being in sync with the right.
The non-renewal of the On Digital Media (ODM) licence, the holding company of StarSat TV, will have a significant economic impact and worsen unemployment in South Africa.
Hundreds of jobs in South Africa are at stake due to what appears to be Icasa’s uncompromising attitude toward the broadcaster which has 500000 subscribers in South Africa.
StarTimes has 60 million customers in 23 countries on the African continent. Icasa issued a statement saying that despite many reminders, ODM submitted its licence renewal application three months late on November 10, 2023, resulting in the current situation.
The question arises: Is Icasa acting as a proxy for the struggling MultiChoice, which is losing ground with subscribers in South Africa and on the continent due to its exorbitant fees?
Its rival StarSat is a low-cost broadcaster whose fees in South Africa range from R130 to R360 a month. It serves viewers who are not able to afford the premier bouquet on MultiChoice, which is around R1 000.
MultiChoice is known to strategically engage politicians and regulators in ways that seek to influence decision-makers.
Icasa’s belligerent attitude is not in line with its mandate or the government’s stance.
Its action will remove a smaller but key player in the pay TV market space. What does this mean for competition?
ODM has been operating in South Africa for 15 years, first as TOPTV in 2013, as it was then known, and secured fresh investment which saved the broadcaster from closure and thus ensuring a plurality of voices in broadcast media.
Surely, the Competition Commission would also have something to say about eliminating a competitor in a market space in which only two are operating?
In addition, Article 16 of the Bill of Rights in South Africa’s Constitution implies that a multiplicity of voices is necessary for freedom of expression to thrive.
While it is unacceptable for StarSat or any other broadcaster to operate without compliance, there seem to be valid reasons why the company failed to meet its licence renewal deadline.
The company maintains that it has conducted consistent and comprehensive communication with Icasa and has extensive correspondence to prove it.
Therefore, this begs the question of whether the regulator is doing its utmost to help the struggling MultiChoice eliminate competition because there seems to be no logical reason to take such drastic action.
Not only does it affect jobs and leave subscribers without affordable alternatives, but it also affects an ecosystem that jeopardises the livelihoods of a broader network of over 4 000 dealers and sales agents who rely on its operations.
In a media sector under pressure, StarSat is responsible for the dissemination of information, entertainment, and education to the public.
Apart from “National Geographic”, one of their key programmes is the news and current affairs programming on the BRICS Channel which goes beyond headlines, providing in-depth analysis and compelling stories that impact the lives of citizens from the BRICS countries and the world at large.
What would government have to say about the removal of the only platform in South Africa and the continent providing a space for BRICS to be covered with in-depth analysis as on StarSat?
In a statement, StarSat said due to challenges in securing new investment in a competitive market, along with the introduction of a new shareholders agreement and the economic pressures following the COVID-19 pandemic, ODM submitted its license renewal application to Icasa later than the required deadline.
Despite multiple attempts to seek guidance from Icasa officials to address these regulatory challenges, ODM appears not to have received the necessary support.
A legal review application is pending to address the substantive legal issues between the two parties once the court date is set.
However, it does seem that Icasa is oblivious to the repercussions of its actions, which are contrary to the government’s position on attracting foreign investment.
It behoves Icasa to make a special effort to engage StarSat’s ODM to rescue the pay TV platform and thereby save jobs, ensure a multiplicity of voices and provide viewers with a reasonable and cheaper alternative to MultiChoice.
Surely, that in essence should be the fundamental task of the regulator?
Edwin Naidu is a communications specialist and founder of social enterprise start-up Higher Education Media.