MultiChoice apologises for bad communication over billing changes and DStv over-charge mistakes: 'We certainly could have done better'.

MultiChoice is apologising for the pay-TV operator's bad communication to customers, its call centre problems as well as billing problems and overcharging mistakes as a result of switching to a new billing system which has angered and confused thousands of DStv subscribers.

DStv subscribers are urged to check their bills after thousands of customers have been seen double billing as well as overcharges ranging from R20 to even R1 000, leading to a flood of complaints on HelloPeter, in the media, on social media and to MultiChoice.

While an initial statement from MultiChoice to the media failed to apologise, Mark Rayner, MultiChoice South Africa CEO is now saying that the Randburg-based pay-TV operator messed up in not properly communicating to DStv subscribers and with billing mistakes and that it is apologising unreservedly".

In an interview with Joanne Joseph on the 702 radio station, Mark Rayner explained that "A couple of weeks ago in late August we made a major change to our billing system to simplify the way our billing is handled for our customers."

"Around our customers who have our DStv Price Lock product in this month we collapsed the billing into one single account and double-billed the hardware portion of that contract."

"So the majority of the bill is for the subscription, the small amount is for the Explora. It's moved that billing from arrears to advanced, which means that in this particular month there's a double billing. So that's something that we really didn't communicate well to our customers and we apologise unreservedly."

"There was another problem as well where we had customers experiencing some small amounts of overcharging and I can tell the customers with confidence we reversed all of those charges and any credits will be reflecting on their account."

"Where we really need to take it on the chin and apologise unreservedly is we didn't communicate this well in advance," said Mark Rayner. He said that although MultiChoice's intentions were good to try and simplify things longer-term the pay-TV operator messed up with subscribers and the smaller amounts they've been billed for.

Several listeners called in to complain about MultiChoice's services, about A+E Networks' History, Lifetime and Crime+Investigation Network channels being dumped from DStv at the end of the month, and being placed on hold for very long by the MultiChoice Call Centre.

Laetitia from Soweto who was trying to get answers on her overbilled account said "I was sent from pillar to post. Last week I had to pay R1000. Then they said I must pay another R300. I asked what is it for? Nobody could tell me. Nobody knows what's going on. I tried to speak to team leaders. I was told that they are in meetings. They make you hold on for almost 2 hours on the phone. It's just a total mess."

Mark Rayner "we learnt a couple of lessons on the system change-over. It was a fairly major upgrade. Certainly we could have done better. Where we certainly could have done better is the communication to our customers."

Radio 702 talk show and presenter Eusebius McKaiser created hostile environment, showed intolerance, Broadcasting Complaints Commission finds.

702 has breached the Broadcasting Code with the Broadcasting Complaints Commission of South Africa (BCCSA) finding that the talk radio station breached the Broadcasting Code after a talk show presenter created a hostile environment, showed intolerance against opposing views and exhibited a lack of respect towards callers and other views.

702, owned by Primedia Broadcasting, wasn't fined but got reprimanded by the BCCSA following listener complaints, after a morning show on 7 May 2017 with presenter Eusebius McKaiser.

Listeners submitted complaints to the BCCSA regarding Eusebius McKaiser's apparent "censorship" and told the BCCSA that despite the presenter's "vitriolic attack" on former South African president FW de Klerk they would have liked to hear what the De Klerk Foundation would have said it the representative wasn't cut off.

"Many people would have liked to hear what the chair of the De Klerk foundation has to say about this sensitive subject but Eusebius McKaiser's censorship will only allow selected comments to go on air.

“I feel that this kind of conduct is upsetting to a lot of people and also agitating in an already volatile social climate. Eusebius McKaiser’s conduct does not help the people of South Africa to understand the importance of open, honest dialogue as an important tool to solve problems. He causes tension between races and people with different background,” one of the complainants, Thomas Mihal told the BCCSA.

Dave Steward, chairman of The FW de Klerk Foundation, who was heard on the day's phone-in show, was one of the other complainants, and said he was "shouted down and ultimately cut off by Eusebius McKaiser".

702's topic revolved around the inclusion of the former apartheid president FW de Klerk's inclusion in a forum of former presidents aiming at promoting a dialogue around issues facing the country, and whether it was appropriate for an apartheid president to be included in the initiative known as the National Foundations Dialogue Initiative (NFDI). 

Eusebius McKaiser cut the representative off who was on the line.

702 told the BCCSA that it disputes the allegations that the talk show was a "vitriolic attack on FW de Klerk", saying the show's intention was not to criticise FW de Klerk. 702 told the BCCSA that former president Thabo Mbeki and current president Jacob Zuma were both also criticised in the programme.

The BCCSA in its judgement found that Eusebius McKaiser "didn't make reasonable efforts to fairly present opposing points of view", that there was "a hostile attitude demonstrated towards De Klerk by what both the presenter and his guests said", that the presenter didn't correct a caller using the word "criminal" and that the only caller making an effort to put up an opposing view had his call cut off.

The BCCSA found that the 702 talk show exhibited "a lack of fairness", that "the lack of respect towards callers and lack of tolerance towards views which do not correspond to those of the presenter also appear from what is said" and that "these are qualities that are expected of presenters in this type of programme".

BCCSA: '702's Eusebius not tolerant'

The BCCSA also slammed 702 for arguing that the show was not aimed at discussing FW de Klerk’s views, calling the radio station's argument "to say the least, ingenious".

"The many times that De Klerk’s name was mentioned during the programme, which lasted 80 minutes, is proof of the fact that the programme was about him and, by necessary implication, his views," the BCCSA says in its judgment.

"702 argued that it would have been irresponsible to have De Klerk on the show. We find that it was a contravention of clause 13(2) of the Code not to have him or a spokesperson of his foundation on the show."

"The first complainant, who is a spokesperson for the FW de Klerk Foundation, was not invited to appear on the talk show, and when he phoned in, he was cut off before finishing his contribution to the debate."

"It is clear to us that the intention of the presenter was to cast as bad a light as possible on De Klerk and in the process he was not tolerant towards opposing views, thereby not obtaining balance between opposing points of view".

"It is important to state that nowhere in this judgment do we say or even suggest that 702 should not have discussed De Klerk or his views. This is the content of the right to freedom of expression which the BCCSA enforces."

The BCCSA says "the presenter did not make a reasonable effort to fairly present opposing points of view. Neither did 702 allow De Klerk a right to reply, while its intention with the programme was clearly to criticise De Klerk".

702 was not ordered to broadcast a summary of the finding and the BCCSA judgement found that "the appropriate sanction in this instance will be a reprimand" for 702.

'THE DUMBER THE BETTER'? Broadcasting Complaints Commission finds that 702's Redi Tlhabi is allowed to criticise and call the government stupid.

Radio woman Redi Tlhabi is allowed to critise the South African government and can say that when it comes to government leadership it looks like a case of the dumber the better.

In a case brought before the Broadcasting Complaints Commission of South Africa (BCCSA), it ruled that Redi Tlhabi and talk radio station 702 has the right to give her view in an open, democratic society.

A listener, Esethu Hasane, spokesperson for the department of sport and recreation, laid a complaint against Redi Tlhabi after an open call-in segment on radio 702 in late January – the type of open line call-in's now incidentally banned by the SABC for listeners who want to talk politics.

Redi Hasane, a university graduate working in government, told the BCCSA that Redi Tlhabi's comment was offensive, condescending and degrading to the dignity of the complainant. He said "commentators get away with many things in the name of criticising president Zuma. They make a living of criticising people but don't want to be critisiced".

Redi Tlhabi did the call-in segment after president Jacob Zuma's shocking firing of Nhlanhla Nene as finance minister. She referred to Zuma's statement in December 2015 in Mpumalanga that "the people should not pay attention to people who talk too much on television because educated black people think they are clever".

When a caller asked Redi Tlhabi why the South African government doesn't consult intellectuals, Redi Tlhabi said that "they are intimidated, they told them they are clever blacks and because somehow clever people are dangerous to leadership, the dumber the better".

"I think they are there, they're writing, they're speaking, they're joining protests, and all of that and of course we have an anti-intellectual leadership".

Hasane took offense but the BCCSA found that Redi Tlhabi's show is "aimed at sophisticated, intelligent members of the public who are likely to know, understand and appreciate" that her comments are often provocative and argumentative.

'Constitution guarantees her freedom of expression'

Esethu Hasane lodged a case at the BCCSA, saying Redi Tlhabi's comments suggested that there is an absence of intellectuals in the leadership of the country and that "the dumber the better" is the requirement to be in that leadership.

"It can't be okay for a radio host to say 'the dumber the better' about the leadership of our country like it was not okay for that eNCA anchor [Andrew Barnes] to mock the minister's pronunciation of an English word. I would imagine that if Redi was a white lady, she was not going to get away with saying that the leadership of our country is dumb".

The BCCSA found that "Redi Tlhabi's comments may have been offensive and elitist but the fact of the matter is that the Constitution guarantees her freedom of expression to receive or impart information or ideas".

"Inasmuch as Hasane has a constitutional right to freedom of expression, so too does Redi Tlhabi enjoy the same right".

"The right to freedom of expression is not dependent on the dissemanation of acceptable or rational ideas only; indeed it extends to opinion or views that might be anathema to those who occupy influential positions in society or in institutions," the BCCSA found.

The BCCSA found that the Redi Tlhabi's 702 programme did not contravene the Broadcasting Code and the complaint was not upheld.