Media Development & Diversity Agency (MDDA) Board: Finalisation; Government Communication & Information Service (GCIS), Media De

This premium content has been made freely available

Communications and Digital Technologies

04 November 2005
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report

COMMUNICATIONS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
4 November 2005
MEDIA DEVELOPMENT AND DIVERSITY AGENCY (MDDA) BOARD: FINALISATION; GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION SERVICE (GCIS), MEDIA DEVELOPMENT AND DIVERSITY AGENCY AND INTERNATIONAL MARKETING COUNCIL (IMC): BRIEFINGS

Chairperson:

Mr M Lekgoro (ANC)

Documents handed out:

Presentation to Portfolio Committee on Communications
GCIS Budget Vote
International Marketing Council Presentation to the Portfolio Committee
Annual Report Presentation to Parliament

SUMMARY
The Government Communication and Information Service (GCIS) reported that there has been a breakthrough in extending the government communication system to the local sphere. Their product innovation included a mass publication, a magazine, Vuk’uzenzele! and a television programme, Azishe Ke! Opportunity Knocks. The GCIS had paid serious attention to effective, administration which had resulted in an unqualified Audit Report. Their budget was R203 149 million, of which 99, 8% had been spent.

The Media Development and Diversity Agency were a development agency that aimed to assist in building a diverse, vibrant and creative media environment. They did this through grant support to non profit and small commercial media projects, conducting and funding research and facilitating capacity building in the sector. They had received an unqualified Audit Report, and income amounted to R17, 8 million for the financial year. The Agency had met all regulatory requirements on the division of grant funds and governance.

The International Marketing Council had undertaken two overseas missions, to the USA and to Germany and the UK. Their marketing mechanism included a marketing piece on CNBC Europe, coverage of South Africa during the G8 Summit, communication celebrating ten years of democracy in South Africa, surveys and supplements on South Africa in international media, adding ten more taxis with South African colours to the streets of London and their website. The Council had received an unqualified Audit Report.

The Committee discussed the dissemination of GCIS’s publications, editorial control of the GCIS’s television programme, the International Marketing Council’s diaspora programme, and how the newly passed Convergence Bill would affect the Media Development and Diversity Agency.

MINUTES
Finalisation of MDDA board members
The Committee unanimously recommended Mr CJ Moerdyk and Mr T Rara to be appointed to the Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA) Board.

Government Communications and Information Service (GCIS)
Mr Tony Trew, Deputy CEO: GCIS, said there had been a breakthrough in extending the government communication system to the local sphere, to increase public participation and access to information about the provision of local services. The Multipurpose Community Centre programme continued to progress, moving beyond the target set by the Government’s Plan of Action for 2004. The Batho Pele Internet Gateway and the 1020 Batho Pele Call Centre was used as an integral part of government communication.

The capacity and standards of government communication had been enhanced by the second intake of the Academy of Government Communication and Marketing and a survey that had been done among journalists on the perceptions of the communication system.

Product innovations included a mass publication on economic opportunities published in all official languages and disseminated through country-wide workshops. Efforts to extend the reach of information on opportunities included the current television series produced in partnership with the SABC, Azishe ke! Opportunity knocks, and the launch of a popular government magazine, Vuk’uzenzele! The government news agency Bua News Service also contributed to public access to information on government activities.

In the past year GCIS had paid unremitting attention to effective, efficient administration. This had resulted in an unqualified Audit Report. Their budget was R203 149 million and included allocations to the MDDA and International Marketing Council. They had managed to spend 99, 8% of their allocated budget. The under-expenditure related mainly to vacancies that arose from staff turnover.

The GCIS’s staff in the 2004/05 year had totalled 432. At 31 March 2005 the number of filled posts was 365, of which 47, 9% were male. People with disabilities accounted for 2,5% of staff compared with the government target of 2%. The racial composition was as follows: 74% African, 14, 7% white, 8, 8% coloured and 2, 5% Indian.

The fostering of partnerships in the whole society in united action around common development goals was a focal theme in the work of the GCIS.

Mr Trew showed an episode of the programme Azishe ke! Opportunity knocks to the Committee to conclude his presentation.

Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA)
Ms Libby Lloyd, Chief Executive Officer: MDDA, said that the MDDA was a development agency that aimed to assist in building an environment where a diverse, vibrant and creative media flourishes and reflects the needs of all South Africans. They did this through grant support to non profit and small commercial media projects, conducting and funding research and facilitating capacity building in the sector.

The MDDA had received an unqualified Audit Report, signed funding agreements with all their private partners and supported up to 66 different projects.

Regulations set out criteria for the MDDA’s support, which took the form of mentoring support, once off projects and ongoing support. Support for 51 media projects had been approved and funds for 15 community radio projects had been approved. The total funds approved amounted to R8, 7 million. Regarding capacity building, 160 different community and small commercial media organisations had attended three workshops on marketing and advertising and the MDDA have given bursaries to 21 projects to attend media management courses.

The MDDA’s funders included the government, Independent Newspapers, Media 24 Ltd, Midi TV and the SABC.

The MDDA’s income raised, including debtors, amounted to R17, 8 million for the financial year. At the end of the financial year, R14, 7 million remained in their bank account. This amount was made up of grants accrued of R8,2 million to be dispersed over three years and a R5,6 million surplus made up of funds remaining from broadcast and print partners to be expended by August 2005.

The MDDA had met all regulatory requirements on the division of grant funds and governance. They had also developed a grant making cycle to ensure risk management and ongoing support of projects. They had five project staff members and four administration staff members.

International Marketing Council (IMC)
Ms Yvonne Johnston, Chief Executive Officer: IMC, said that more of the world’s top media had recanted their gloomy attitudes towards South Africa. The IMC had gone to great pains to realistically establish present perceptions about South Africa among different stakeholders.

The IMC had undertaken an investment mission to the USA, visiting New York, Chicago and Atlanta, with the primary aim of marketing South Africa in the world’s largest economy. A mission to Germany and London was used to run focused seminars encouraging people to do business with South Africa.

Marketing initiatives included a marketing piece on CNBC Europe, reaching 5,4 million European business leaders, coverage of South Africa during the G8 Summit, communication celebrating ten years of democracy in South Africa, surveys and supplements on South Africa in international media, and adding ten more taxis with South African colours to the streets of London. There also were several future projects to continue to build the South African brand presence.

The website,
www.southafrica.info reached 1, 6 million page views a month, and 11 million hits.

The IMC’s public relations campaign had gone particularly well over the last few months. Youth Day and its related activities have generated coverage to the value of R750 900 and media interest around the European Mission had generated coverage to value of R367 100.

The IMC had been asked to share their country-branding knowledge and experience with other countries, including Brazil, India, China, Kenya, Zanzibar and Tanzania. One of the IMC’s key deliverables had been to inspire brand alignment, and they had partnered with companies like Tata, Vodacom, and El Corte Ingles (a Spanish retail chain).

The support structures of the Communication Resource Centre and the Information Resource Centre proved to be an invaluable resource.

The IMC country manager in the USA had experienced a productive year in which sentiments towards South Africa had warmed appreciably. Some of highlights of the Washington office were: assisting the embassy and consulates with messaging and presentations to diverse audiences, responses to negative news articles, public diplomacy workshops and growing IMC collaboration with the New York and Chicago consulates.

The London office has intervened reactively to a number of negative news-stories, liaised closely with journalists, arranging meetings for the presidential spokesperson, fostered a positive image of South Africa at meetings of influential people, given a BBC Hard Talk interview, and initiated a South Africa Diaspora initiative in the UK.

Research to assess external perceptions had been performed, yielding both positive and negative aspects. The IMC were also carrying out a domestic mood tracking study, national perceptions audit and stakeholder perceptions survey.

The IMC had received an unqualified Audit Report for the second year running. They would still have to improve some of their systems and tax exemption remained a key issue.

Ms Johnston showed a video which gave an overarching view of South Africa to the Committee. The video would be used to promote South Africa at conferences and such.

Discussion
Ms D Smuts (DA) said that as a member of the opposition she looked carefully for propaganda in GCIS publications and the television programme. She was a little worried about a person who said that he did not have a problem with the government while the local elections were looming. She asked who was in charge of editorial control of the Azishe ke! Opportunity knocks television programme. Mr Trew said the arrangement was that the SABC would provide the slot, while GCIS would pay for the production of the program, for which they used a production company. The SABC had editorial control.

Ms Smuts enquired about a tender for the publication accompanying the television programme of the GCIS. Mr Trew said the tender was separate from the television programme.

Ms Smuts asked the MDDA’s opinion on the R23 million Vuk’uzenzele! Magazine, and if they thought it could have been outsourced to the MDDA. Ms Lloyd said they would always welcome more money.

Mr K Khumalo (ANC) said he had a problem with the GCIS’s website, as it did not reach ordinary people. He asked what they had done to address this problem.

Mr Trew agreed that there was a problem with the capacity of people to absorb information. They were sensitive to questions of content, and had to give people practical information to improve their lives through the government. They were disseminating information on the government’s plan of action through many ways and had used a publication in tabloid form. Additionally, they had had a photo story version of the government’s programme put into newspapers with 4,2 million readers. There were other waves of information, through their departments, the television programme and the magazine Vuk’uzenzele!. However, they had to assess how far this information had disseminated. They have been shifting their advertising to media with the broadest reach.

Mr Khumalo was worried that the IMC’s diaspora programme was based in the UK and USA. He asked if they could expand to Australia, were many South Africans lived, as well as Africa.

Ms Johnston said the IMC was a very new organisation with budgetary constraints. They had only put people in Washington and London, in conjunction with the Department of Trade and Industry. The branding of a nation was a twenty year project, at the very least. It had been decided to start their diaspora programme in London because there were 600 000 South Africans there. They would use this programme to see if it worked. They had a small staff, but 25 young South Africans in London provided their labour for free. They hoped to have a proper strategy by the following year. There was a growing cadre of South Africans in the USA and UK who were very positive about South Africa. Australia would be a good target, but they could only work on a country by country basis.

Mr Khumalo said that Parliament had passed the Convergence Bill the previous day. He asked how the MDDA would be affected by the new legislation in terms of the ability to raise sustainable funds.

The Chairperson asked what their preference would be in terms of the funding that the Bill would provide for.

Ms Lloyd said the Bill was something that they were looking into. The Bill would mean that they would receive a much larger amount of money as broadcasters indicated that they would give money to the MDDA. It would be a huge challenge to make proper use of these increased funds.

Mr Khumalo said all three organisations had very good reports, but if they had any problems or challenges not reported, the Committee would not be able to assist them. A representative of the GCIS said that they had reported cases of dismissal of staff in their Annual Report. Thus, their problems had been reported openly.

A representative of the MDDA said they were a new organisation that faced massive challenges. They were trying to reach communities who were not exposed to the media. The capacity of their projects to absorb funds was a challenge. They had to create capacity. They ran workshops and provided training. It was a long term process. Enormous expectations were placed on them. More applications were received than could be funded.

Reverend Khumalo (ANC) enquired about GCIS’s relationship with their provincial departments. A GCIS representative said the provincial government system was elaborate. Quarterly forums were held to deal with provincial strategies. The national strategy was filtered through to the provinces and local governments.

Reverend Khumalo enquired about the GCIS’s training academy. A GCIS representative said the academy was only able to accept 40 students, who were government communicators. They were also admitting staff from local government level.

Mr S Kholwane (ANC), referring to the GCIS’s distribution of publications, asked if they had reached areas where television, radio and newspapers were not available. He asked what measures were being implemented and how much effort was being put into reaching those areas. The Chairperson asked if they had thought of using the constituency offices of all parties as distribution centres for their publications. Mr Khumalo said very few people knew the government’s plan of action. With publications there was the problem of illiteracy. Radio and television would be very important in communicating the government’s programme.

Mr Trew said every district had officers responsible for distribution. They had a distribution point database. Post Offices, NGO’s, constituency offices, libraries and shops were used as distribution points. They also had good relationships with schools. Mr Kholwane said that this did not happen in his constituency. A representative of the GCIS replied that they had an agreement that every publication should be put in Members’ boxes in Parliament. They could then ask for more and for their constituency offices. Mr Trew said they took dissemination very seriously. He would try to follow up on this issue. They were also trying to get people to put demands to them.

Mr Oliphant (ANC) said Members of Parliament were also ambassadors of South Africa. He suggested that the IMC use the resource that had in the Members.

Mr Oliphant was interested in the breakdown of the MDDA’s expenditure. He said they did not have to respond in the meeting. Ms L Yengeni (ANC) found it difficult to understand how the MDDA spent their money. Ms Lloyd said their income funding agreements with their partners were fixed for five years. This meant that inflation was a problem.

Mr Oliphant asked how many vacancies the GCIS had. The GCIS had had 25 vacancies at the end of their financial year.

Mr R Pieterse (ANC) said he was very happy that the organisations had unqualified Audit Reports. He also complemented the GCIS on their website.

Mr Pieterse asked how the IMC would use the launch of the South African Large Telescope (SALT) and Proudly South African organisation in the promotion of South Africa. Ms Johnston replied that they had brought out science and technology writers to South Africa to witness the SALT launch. They had also covered it on their web portal. She could not answer on behalf of Proudly South African, as they were a separate organisation.

Ms Yengeni asked if the MDDA could attach a monetary value to each of their projects. A representative of the MDDA said their Annual Report mentioned all the projects they supported. They had decided not to provide figures for each project, as it could create tension. However, these figures were available and could be sent to the Committee.

The Chairperson wondered when there would be a symbol, that when seen, would be recognised by people as representing South Africa, similar to the USA’s Statue of Liberty.

The Chairperson asked if the positive feeling towards 27 April, Freedom Day, was waning. He asked how the IMC was making that day alive. Ms Johnston said 27 April was the most important day on the IMC’s catalogue. They had to reiterate to the youth what Freedom Day meant.

The Meeting was adjourned.

 

Audio

No related

Documents

No related documents

Present

  • We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: