What you don't know about the messy and called-off media day of A+E Networks UK in South Africa for Idris Alba and the History channel on DStv.

I know the rest of the press brigade have remained silent but I need to weigh in on A+E Networks UK and their Africa's office hysterical History hufflepuff with Idris Elba that set back relationships with the media and broke trust - something that I have no idea how long it will take to repair or build up again.

It's the second time (and the second time in a row) that a documentary made in South Africa and also specifically about Nelson Mandela for, and on, A+E Networks UK's History channel on MultiChoice's DStv ends up being more in the news for the scandal and drama around it, than for the actual programme and its contents.

It's no accident.

By now the media intelligentsia and every South African TV critic will know how Idris Elba was on his way to South Africa for work and a "secret" A+E Networks UK press junket for its South Africa office at the end of November to promote a documentary shown on History (DStv 186).

I say "secret" since A+E Networks UK's South African office and its PR company deliberately chose not to tell all the press who they do lip-service to as having a so-called real media relationship with, about it.

It wouldn't have been that big of a deal, but of course Idris Elba who didn't want to continue to do his/the work he agreed to as a professional artist, abruptly left Heathrow airport at the very last minute and went back home when he discovered his daughter wouldn't be allowed into the country without an unabridged birth certificate.

The turnaround, visit cancellation and scuppered press jaunt of course flung A+E Networks UK, A+E Networks' office in South Africa and Idris Elba into the national and international headlines - but for all the wrong reasons.

Dear Idris suddenly became the latest poster child of the South Africa's cause célèbre around the controversial visa regulations damaging tourism, travel, the economy and making overseas visitors no longer wanting to fly to South Africa.

It's presumably not the type of hard news, banner headline type stories A+E Networks UK, A+E Networks in Africa, the History channel or MultiChoice wanted to see their names and brands mentioned in who work hard to bring TV viewers entertainment.

What most people won't know is how A+E Networks UK, A+E Networks' South Africa office headed up by Anthea Petersen as regional director, and its PR agency JAG Communications actually damaged its standing, relationships and what trust there was with the South African media and TV critics because of this incident.

A+E Networks in Africa and JAG Communications didn't bother to tell all the journalists and TV critics they work with and supposedly have a relationship with, about the impending Idris Elba visit to Johannesburg and media day to screen the Mandela documentary and do interviews.

The irony in A+E Networks UK and JAG Communications' lack of proper and expected communication and media relations was however twofold.

Firstly a lot of media knew about it beforehand anyway even though they were not even shown the common courtesy of just being told (and they were miffed, felt dissed and decided to deliberately not give exposure to the programme and focus on other programming).

Secondly, while A+E Networks and JAG worked on "secretly" bringing press in to Johannesburg, almost all of South Africa's journalists and TV critics from Cape Town and Durban, but hilariously kept in the dark, were already in Johannesburg anyway for M-Net and Mzansi Magic's Idols finale on Sunday 22 November.

Since A+E Networks in South Africa and its PR company couldn't bother to reach out and talk and have conversations with the media beforehand (it's called having and building public relations), they were apparently clueless that press would and were already present, and that they knew about the impending Idris Alba presser. 

I can't repeat most of what the contingent of media from across South Africa - all together and waiting for the live finale of Idols - had to say for hours on Sunday afternoon when the news broke that the (selfish?) Idris Elba turned around at Heathrow and decided to no longer come and work in South Africa to promote a documentary film for History.

What I will say is that the sentiment was extremely negative, and I suppose still is: towards Idris Elba ("Why if his holiday plans are no longer working out does he not continue to come to South Africa to do his work?") - as well as towards the History channel and by implication A+E Networks in Africa.

"Silly" and "Why don't they properly communicate?" and "They [meaning History/ A+E Networks] clearly showed who doesn't matter to them, so they and their show doesn't matter to me" were some of the things I heard from various journalists who were - and I'm sure remain - extremely unhappy with History and A+E Networks UK.

After the blow-up and after reporting the news of the media event's cancellation, I asked if Idris Elba is doing interviews for the History documentary. 

Even at this late stage, A+E Networks UK by proxy of their PR agency couldn't sense that what was needed was to reach out to all relevant media and to provide something usable to everyone.

The flat response back was: "He did do telephonic interviews with those media who were scheduled to meet him in Johannesburg".

Since silence is golden, I doubt if A+E Networks UK's South African office and JAG Communications have the faintest idea of just how many journalists and TV critics were and are pissed off by what is perceived as a diss. 

What's interesting is how everyone from the press corps who were together on Sunday 22 November and who talked about the Idris Elba media day and the spoke in the plan, shared the same negative remarks and sentiment towards History.

What I also now by now is that people - especially journalists - don't forget these things. 

Inadequate reputation management has seared a certain (very negative) perception and feeling and attitude towards History, Idris Elba and A+E Networks in South Africa into the minds of several journalists covering television - something that will be difficult to change or lessen over time.

I always think a TV channel or a show or broadcaster and the intermediaries like their marketers, publicists or PR agencies want to build and maintain and grow real relationship and above cultivate a bigger degree of mutual trust and respect. 

Obviously in this case not - where the exact opposite happened.

Gladly choose the "select" press you want to work with, the ones you want and will bother to communicate with, and then those you won't tell anything, or keep informed, or be as open and honest with. Continue to run your "tiered" system of press management and see if and how well that works.

Just then don't ever complain about media or TV critics not liking you, or sit and wonder why there are not more and deeper media relationships, a lack of trust from journalists, a lingering negative media perception about your brand(s) and general journo disinterest.

The answer is that bad public relations actually caused it.

Charges in disciplinary hearing against SABC COO Hlaudi Motsoeneng suddenly reduced to just 3; Hlaudi pleads not guilty as media is shut out of hearing.

The SABC's disciplinary hearing against its chief operating officer (COO) Hlaudi Motsoeneng has turned into yet another public broadcaster farce with the charges leveled against its highly controversial and famously matricless boss suddenly deleted from the charge sheet from 6 to just 3, to which Hlaudi Motsoeneng pleaded not guilty - while the media got shut out of the proceedings.

The SABC's contentious and bizarre disciplinary hearing of Hlaudi Motsoeneng that suddenly resumed this week after it was "terminated" and "cancelled" last week is losing credibility, transparency and integrity.

It comes as the disciplinary process now suddenly has to be completed by this coming Saturday according to a High Court order (which said it must be done within 60 days), which is not really leaving enough time for due process to be followed.

Already the disciplinary hearing chairperson changed twice: First advocate William Mokhari who abruptly disbanded the disciplinary hearing last week on Thursday saying it would serve no purpose other than being an "academic" exercise - only for the hearing to be re-established and starting again this week with a new chairperson, Willem Johannes (EJ) Edeling.

Already the disciplinary hearing changed prosecutors three times: First labour lawyer Sandile July who was fired after alleged irregularities with the appointment, then Mponyana Ledwaba who abruptly left last week, and now Tumisho Phalane as the 3rd prosecutor to work on the disciplinary hearing.

Tumisho Phalane told the hearing and chairperson on Monday that he doesn't have enough to prepare. Chairperson EJ Edeling said the case must proceed because the process needs to conclude by Saturday at the latest.

On Tuesday the chairperson barred the media from attending the proceedings.

The SABC is also suddenly just going ahead with 3 of the original list of charges against Hlaudi Motsoeneng with no indication of why not more charges are being made from the litany of alleged transgressions contained in the Public Protector's scathing report about Hlaudi Motsoeneng that was made public in February 2014.

The SABC's disciplinary hearing against Hlaudi Motsoeneng has now been dramatically reduced, instead of being expanded, to just allegations of gross dishonesty, gross misconduct and abuse of power.

Among the charges dropped and suddenly gone and deleted from the latest charge sheet include the extensive report from the Public Protector of how Hlaudi Motsoeneng was directly involved in allegedly increasing his ballooning salary several times per year.

Ar R3,784 million per year, Hlaudi Motsoeneng now earns more than president Jacob Zuma.

Hlaudi Motsoeneng pleaded not guilty to all three of the remaining charges in his disciplinary hearing.

On Tuesday Jabulani Mabaso, head of human resources was the first to testify against Hlaudi Motsoeneng.

Lorraine Francois, an executive auditor was the second to testify against Hlaudi Motsoeneng.

Hlaudi Motsoeneng's disciplinary hearing was supposed to start on 30 October but was abruptly postponed to 1 December.

It was then again postponed to 2 December. It ran for only 2 and 3 December after being "cancelled".

It was then reconvened for an unknown reason and set to start on 7 December. On 7 December is was again postponed to 8 December which became the first real day of the disciplinary hearing.

It now raises serious concerns as to whether a judicious and proper disciplinary hearing can take place given the little time left before Saturday when the period of 60 days - as ordered by the High Court - is reached.

While the SABC had a whole two months to start and conclude proceedings in a disciplinary hearing against Hlaudi Motsoeneng, the public broadcaster pushed it to the very brink, making it likely very difficult to thoroughly have witnesses and others give testimony, for more additional and the original other 3 charges to be brought, and for due process and due diligence to be followed.

All of these things are casting a shadow of Hlaudi Motsoeneng's disciplinary hearing which is continuing today with 2 further witnesses expected to be called.

It's not you, its them. MultiChoice's DStv Catch Up service is definitely still not working, despite a message that it was working again.

It's definitely not you. It's them, so don't feel stressed or anxious as a DStv subscriber with a PVR or a DStv Explora thinking you're the only one.

MultiChoice's DStv Catch Up service which has gone through more than a month now of ongoing problems and not working properly is still not working - despite telling DStv subscribers that it's working again.

It's definitely not fixed and the DStv Catch Up service is still broken. As a DStv subscriber you can't trust that what you think will be pushed to you and what content will be there.

Please take precaution and do manual recordings of what you want to watch. You can't assume that the programming that used to be on your box will be - because a lot of it isn't and won't.

DStv subscribers have not been told exactly what's wrong with DStv Catch Up, only that there's been problems.

MultiChoice said the problems plaguing DStv Catch Up is due to "software deployments" but there's been no specifics as to whose software, why and what exactly regarding this new software deployment is causing the DStv Catch Up service to not work as it should.

MultiChoice said there's been "unforeseen issues" but isn't saying what these unforeseen issues are.

These DStv Catch Up problems have now continued for weeks - in fact for longer than a month, and it's ongoing, despite DStv telling its subscribers a few days ago that it was fixed.

The result is that the trust that DStv subscribers can have in its video-on-demand (VoD) service (and definitely that I have) is now down to zero.

I personally have no expectation or trust that something I expect to be on the DStv Catch Up service would actually be on.

I'm back to (having to) set manual recordings for every single thing I want to watch and previously assumed would be on the DStv Explora.

On Sunday afternoon I left my house for Sunday evening dinner with friends. I just knew I had to manually go and record Carte Blanche on M-Net since I had zero faith that it would show up on the DStv Catch Up service's menu.

Carte Blanche is just one of the titles that used to be on DStv Catch Up but has been missing - along with several others.

While I (luckily recorded) it, by Monday afternoon - exactly as I feared - the latest episode of Carte Blanche wasn't available on MultiChoice's DStv Catch Up service where it should be and I don't have any hope that the episode ever will, exactly as the previous weeks where/when it wasn't.

It's not just M-Net's Carte Blanche. A lot of other shows that's supposed to be on DStv Catch Up, given MultiChoice's assurance to DStv subscribers that DStv Catch Up is working again, simply isn't.

The long and short of it: If you want to watch something that used to be on DStv Catch Up, set a recording for it yourself because DStv Catch Up isn't working properly.

OPINION. M-Net's insane disregard for what its own channels like M-Net, M-Net Edge and Vuzu AMP are - and how its deliberately breaking its own channels propositioning.

M-Net's apparent callous disregard for the very expensive and premium shows the Randburg-based pay-TV broadcaster buys from the big broadcasters in the United States for its M-Net packaged channels on MultiChoice's DStv just keeps growing.

M-Net's insane, misguided and utterly wrong programming choices and allocations - that's done very deliberately - betrays that (a) either there's idiots working there who knows little about television, or that (b) M-Net knows better but doesn't care to follow its own guidelines for its self-compiled channels and what they're supposed to be about.

M-Net runs the M-Net channel on DStv 101, M-Net Edge as its edgier twin on DStv 102, Vuzu AMP on 114 (and its poorer sister Vuzu), as well as a string of Mzansi Magic (DStv 161) type channels in addition to the M-Net Movies family (and of course a channel like M-Net Family!).

Does the chicken now have too many chicks to keep track of?

M-Net comes across as either completely confused about what to do with the shows bought and where it should go, or deliberately doesn't care to put it in the right places where it makes sense for viewers and throwing it into whatever channel where there's an opening.

Imagine buying a separate Cars and a Frozen 50 piece puzzle in those foil packs. Both are from Disney. Imagine opening both, but instead of keeping them separate on the dining room table you jumble them up.

Now you tell two toddlers to build them - indiscriminately using Cars and Frozen puzzle pieces, sticking any piece of the puzzle where any piece will seemingly "fit". You will get somewhere, but eventually it doesn't look pretty.

In my view that's what M-Net as a pay-TV broadcaster seems to be doing with M-Net's various channels like M-Net, Vuzu AMP and M-Net Edge.

It's extremely confusing for viewers, looks to me to be tantamount to very bad planning and execution on M-Net's side, and ends up being bad for all DStv subscribers irrespective of what package they're on - as well as for M-Net terrestrial subscribers.

Just take a look for instance at what M-Net is doing for January 2016 for M-Net (DStv 101), M-Net Edge (DStv 102) and Vuzu AMP (DStv 114).

As just a normal person watching and consuming television, or someone working in television, ask yourself if M-Net executives really are so clueless as to not know better, or whether the people who work there and who are responsible for this really just don't care?

The problem is that M-Net risks becoming exactly like the SABC.

With three TV channels, the SABC repeats and cross broadcast so much programming - every single movie on one channel is shown on another channel after a few weeks for instance, along with soap repeats and other shows daily - that the distinction blurs.

SABC1, SABC2 and SABC3 all have different channel looks and are theoretically different.

Yet because of the actual content shown on them, what's supposed to have set them apart and made them unique and their own "product on the shelf" originally, has been dramatically weakened, tainted, watered-down and homogenised.

If you say each channel has a different feel, is aimed at different LSM groups, courting different advertisers and viewer demos, why is it acceptable to, or why can, one movie or show fit on another channel without a problem?

It shouldn't be "possible" but yet it happens, showing how programming executives are not, and are not able to, keep up the gates and strict separation to keep distinct content that "fit" on one channel, off of another.

SABC1, SABC2 and SABC3 are no longer and haven't been for a long time distinct channels (the SABC calls it its notorious "transversal strategy" - code for when you actually don't have enough content and are constantly "padding" to fill all the schedules).

The channels are no longer different entities and have become more like three content pipes coming out of the same bucket.

M-Net is likewise in a growing bad manner risking diluting its brands of M-Net, M-Net Edge and Vuzu AMP in much the same way - ironically not because of too little new content like the SABC, but because of too much content.

The net effect in the end is however exactly the same: channel brand dilution.

In slotting in shows across its channels, M-Net shows a shocking lack of insight and perspective for what its own channels are, and what they're meant to be.

Like the SABC, these channels are more and more becoming less different.

The same content is "good enough" to apparently go anywhere, instead of being that "good enough" to have only one special place and one channel where it properly fits.

Sleepy Hollow has been on M-Net, then M-Net Edge and now Vuzu AMP. Really? Yes, really.

Game of Thrones is on M-Net and M-Net Edge. Arrow is on M-Net and Vuzu AMP. (And if Arrow is on M-Net, why is Flash that's exactly the same type of show, on Vuzu AMP?)

If Scandal! The Fixer is on M-Net, why is How to Get Away with Murder on Vuzu AMP (where it totally doesn't belong at all)?

It's completely erratic, non-sensical and insane.

M-Net buys its expensive American TV content (bought in dollars) but then seemingly disregards its own channel's propositioning (is extensively typed up guidelines of what channels are and stand for just theoretical brand summaries?).

The result is that viewers (who cares, all DStv subscribers are all the same, right?) are short-changed - and it damages the brand loyalty for individual channels instead of building and maintaining it.

American Idol that the publicists at M-Net and Vuzu AMP call American Idols (sigh) was always on M-Net (DStv 101).

It's one of that channel's signature shows. A short while ago M-Net and Mzansi Magic (DStv 161) together with Telkom gave away a viewer prize for someone and the Idols winner of the 11th season to attend the live finale of the 15th season which will be that show's final season ever.

But guess what? M-Net the big broadcaster just moved and dumped "American Idols" from M-Net the channel and is putting it on Vuzu AMP. It will start on 8 January at 20:30.

How about actually keeping your show that was your show and getting the brand benefits of what you've invested in?

By the time the winner attends the "American Idols" finale of what was a M-Net (DStv 101) competition, the show that is part of your competition and brand exercise is broadcast on ... Vuzu AMP??

I get that M-Net now wants Idols and "American Idols" gone from M-Net (DStv 101) because new hatchling The Voice South Africa is going to create brand confusion and huge conflict if two or all three of them are shown together on one channel.

M-Net clearly wants to keep Idols and The Voice SA from interfering with each other and wants to limit confusion and brand cross-pollution.

Yet strangely M-Net doesn't feel the same about the danger of cross-pollution between its actual channels.

And what about a M-Net and DStv subscriber who've always watched "American Idols" on M-Net (DStv 101)?

What if that person is/was loyal to M-Net or loyal to the show and doesn't know that "American Idols" has moved and is soon starting on Vuzu AMP after Christmas?

Arrow was always on M-Net too. From 5 January at 21:30 for the 4th season it's also suddenly jumping to Vuzu AMP.

Just like Glee and several other shows, M-Net carelessly will move a TV show that started on one channel to several other channels until viewers just give up on trying to find it and keep it.

M-Net's lazy Vuzu AMP publicists apparently couldn't bother to actually watch the show or to come up with a season applicable description, still calling Oliver Queen a "spoiled billionaire playboy" (really? After three years?) who "returns as a changed man determined to clean up the city as a hooded vigilante armed with a bow".

That was applicable for the first season of Arrow and maybe the first few episodes. Viewers who've watched Arrow for three year will now Oliver Queen is definitely not spoilt and that the rest of the team have actually grown and moved on.

Of course you will only know that if you actually cared for the content and are watching it.

Sleepy Hollow that was on M-Net, then moved to M-Net Edge (DStv 102) when that channel launched because its ... edgy.

Well, Sleepy Hollow, sad to say, is suddenly moving to Vuzu AMP from 6 January at 21:30. And I'm not joking.

Why does M-Net have a channel like M-Net Edge or want to have M-Net Edge if Sleepy Hollow is the very first show the channel launched with starting off with the second season - only to by the third season flung Sleepy Hollow away like the chopped off head in the hand of the headless horseman?

The first season of Gotham was on M-Net. The second season was suddenly on M-Net Edge. But if Gotham is the same as Arrow and Flash (and it is!), will the third season of Gotham suddenly pop up on Vuzu AMP?

I don't understand it, it doesn't make any sense to me, and it probably doesn't make any sense because  it's TV programming that's devoid of logic.

When I switch on a TV channel - especially on MultiChoice's DStv where "narrow-casting" and very specific TV channels are added, built and run around very finely-tuned programming genres each with their own narrow content niche - I want to watch that channel and see on it what I expect to find there.

The inverse is also true: I don't want to get there what I didn't expect to be there.

I expect "American Idols" to be on M-Net and I expect Arrow to continue to be on M-Net if that is where Arrow started. Arrow did incredibly well for M-Net ratings wise. Why dump a winner to a smaller channel where it doesn't really belong?

I further expect Sleepy Hollow to be on M-Net Edge if that is where the show fits and where I expect spooky, scary content from M-Net to be shown.

I don't expect How to Get Away with Murder on Vuzu AMP, but that is where it was seemingly pawned off to.

A few weeks ago M-Net fully planned to show the extreme ballet drama Flesh and Bones on M-Net. It blew my mind. That show fully only belongs on M-Net Edge and only someone who has no clue about its content and what it contained would put it on M-Net (DStv 101).

Who at M-Net watches (or is actually maybe not watching)? Who comes up with these seemingly daft allocation and scheduling ideas of whimsy that is damaging not just one channel brand but all of them?

M-Net, M-Net Edge and Vuzu AMP should be unique and "instantly recognisable" by their specific content - otherwise they should be called A, B and C.

The problem is these channels don't keep to their boundaries and that is bad and getting worse.

I love television desperately. I adore "my" shows.

I just wish some of the people at M-Net (the big one) for whom it is more seemingly just a technical exercise as to where what gets plonked down, cared a little more about the various M-Net channels (the individual small ones).

Anyone with different dogs will know: Only that special one always gets to jump and sleep on the bed; only that other special one always gets his special little Beeno biscuits in a silver bowl; and only that other special one gets the longer leash for walks in the park.

Even more so than dogs, M-Net, M-Net Edge and Vuzu AMP each need to get their own special treatment. They - and DStv subscribers - deserve it.

SAVuka TV launches as yet another new video-on-demand (VoD) South African service; will target black South Africans with short videos, 6 reality shows.

SAVuka TV will launch tomorrow as yet another brand-new video-on-demand (VoD) service, aimed at black South Africans and offering viewers short videos ranging from dramas, documentaries, lifestyle shows and new custom-produced reality shows.

SAVuka TV, created by Pencil Productions, joins the quickly getting crowded subscription video-on-demand services (SVoD) in South Africa.

Currently Times Media Group's struggling VIDI which just lowered its prices is battling with MTN FrontRow that just rebranded to VU and lowered its prices as well. Then there's Naspers' ShowMax that is set to expand beyond South Africa's borders very soon, and China's PCCW Global's ONTAPtv.com - all competing for customers in a country where broadband penetration is not just limited and slow but also still prohibitively expensive compared to other countries.

Meanwhile everyone's awaiting the television tsunami of the global streaming giant, Netflix, which is set to launch in South Africa sometime during 2016.

SAVuka TV, running through an app just like ShowMax, ONTAPtv.com and VIDI, says it will bring viewers "groundbreaking television" from Wednesday 9 December and will target township users with content focused "on the rural and township life" and provide "innovative, edgy and probing local content, directly on their mobile phones".

SAVuka TV users will use PayGate through vukatv.com paying R9.99 for a day's access, R19.99 for 5 days and R35 for a monthly subscription. Besides these packages, SAVuka TV will also allow pay-per-view options: R5.50 per view for "Premium" content, R3.50 per view for "Fresh" content and R1.50 per view for "Lite" content.

SAVuka TV will initially only work on the Android platform.

SAVuka TV will include new reality shows and says the SVoD service will give content providers ownership of the content they produce through the "Sidla Sonke profit share model".

""SAVuka TV is groundbreaking in that it not only gives people entertainment anywhere, anytime; it also gives multimedia creatives the freedom to be creative. The Sidla Sonke production funding model ensures mass ownership of content, with rights holders keeping them in perpetuity," says Siphamandla Kunene, SAVuka TV's creative producer.

SAVuka TV will start with 6 reality shows and the former SABC2 Morning Live and e.tv Sunrise presenter Sindy Mabe is working on a breakfast show for SAVuka TV. Other magazine and lifestyle content is also in the works but won't be available or ready at launch, while some "entrepreneurial and spiritual content" will be available when the service starts tomorrow.

"SAVuka TV content primarily seeks to engage and entertain our viewers with content that is intriguing and filled with high drama and parables," says Percy Mthethwa, SAVuka TV's head of content.

"The content projects a positive image of black South Africans and provides them with free educational information they desperately need to make informed decisions," says Percy Mthethwa.

The 6 reality shows that SAVuka TV will launch with are:

Soap Stars
A reality show reflecting the lives of South African soap stars following Motlatsi Mafatshe, Thato Molamu, Sisa Hewana, Maurice Paige and Tony Oseyemi. All is not what it seems in the South African celebrity scene, as we all found out during the SABC's Generations' actors strike and the show reveals soap actors' lives away from the spotlight.

Straight Back
A reality show set in the hair stylist Xoli Ntshingila's salon in Diepkloof, Soweto. Every episode shows sis Xoli Ntshingila and her ill-experienced and outspoken staff transforming women's heads into silky crowns of glory, with Themba Mkandawira who believes in hair glue and Thuli and Nosipho who are lazy.

Salon Nightmares
Zoli Ntshingila and Babalwa Mneno transform small salon owners into balck hair dressing professionals by giving these township businesses facelifts. They visit salon owners who reached out, fearing that their businesses are going down the drain.

Out Living It
Three struggling gay artists in search of "fabulosity" with Bujy Bikwa, Albert Khoza and Olwethu Mlotshwa all running between auditions, rehearsals, shoots, bad agents and industry parties.

Diski Hits and Mrs
A show following soccer wives: Charnelle Paulse (married to Nathan Paulse of Ajax CT), Mpho Mulenga (ex-wife of Clifford Mulenga of SuperSport FC) and Hlengiwe "Sharon Dee" Dlamini (separated from Peter Ndlovu).

Behind the Pulpit
A show following female pastors Stembiso Mtshali, Robert Byalungu, Phindile Nzimande and Thiva Lidzhade opening their homes and ministries to the public. How do divorced pastors navigate the dating game? How are women pastors treated and viewed in the church? An honest account of the day-to-day demands and confrontations on the private and public lives of women of the cloth.

BREAKING. SABC's Hlaudi Motsoeneng disciplinary hearing becomes even more bizarre as the chairperson and prosecutor are suddenly replaced ... again.

The utterly insane disarray and disorganisation of the SABC's bizarre disciplinary hearing against its suspended "on voluntary special leave" chief operating officer (COO) Hlaudi Motsoeneng continued today.

The disciplinary chairperson was suddenly replaced; the prosecutor was suddenly replaced with a third new prosecutor; and the hearing was postponed for a 3rd time to Tuesday.

The shockers and twists and turns of trying to keep up with the latest developments and news of Hlaudi Motsoeneng's disciplinary hearing has made it all but impossible to keep up with the utter insanity of it all.

Hlaudi Motsoeneng's disciplinary was abruptly cancelled on Thursday.

The chairperson advocate William Mokhari on Thursday said the disciplinary hearing of Hlaudi Motsoeneng serves no purpose and would only be "academic" due to multiple ongoing court cases against Hlaudi Motsoeneng, and that the disciplinary hearing has therefore been cancelled.

Now, suddenly, without any word of warning or announcement, William Mokhari is out and replaced by new chairperson, advocate Willem Johannes (EJ) Edeling.

Suddenly - also without warning or announcement - Tumisho Phalane is the new prosecutor in the disciplinary hearing.

It makes Tumisho Phalane the 3rd prosecutor to work on the case. He now says he is not actually ready.

It comes after Mponyana Ledwaba as the SABC's prosecutor is suddenly also gone...

... Who in turn replaced the labour lawyer Sandile July ...

... Who was fired as the lead prosecutor in the disciplinary hearing.

Oh and the case has been postponed again (for a 3rd time now, and after it was "cancelled") to Tuesday.

Prosecutor Tumisho Phalane argued that he didn't have enough time to prepare for the case (which, seeing that he is now the 3rd prosecutor to take on the case) seems like a reasonable argument but overall is so bad and reflects so negatively on the whole disciplinary hearing in totality.

The integrity of something and a process like a disciplinary hearing - and especially this disciplinary hearing of Hlaudi Motsoeneng - must be and had to be above reproach and had to be protected.

Yet another ominously dark cloud is already hanging over all of it. A replaced lead prosecutor. Who then gets replaced. Who then gets replaced.

A chairperson who gets replaced.

A disciplinary hearing supposed to start at the end of October. That gets postponed to 1 December. That gets postponed to 2 December. That starts on 2 December, Runs on 3 December and gets "cancelled" and "adjourned" on 3 December...

... Only to be restarted on 7 December, but then gets "postponed" yet again to start on 8 December.

Let's call this laughable Hlaudi Motsoeneng disciplinary hearing the clear mess that this SABC process once again is: a total shambles.

Idols winner Karabo Mogane grabbed 54,97% of the votes in the final week of the 11th season; was beaten by Mmatema Moremi in 4 weeks out of 10.

The winner of the 11th season of Idols, Karabo Mogane whose debut album will hit shelves on Friday 11 December, managed to grab a 54,97% share of the total votes cast in the final week of the reality singing show.

M-Net (DStv 101) and Mzansi Magic (DStv 161) this afternoon released the voting percentages for the Top 10 weeks of the 11th season of the show that concluded with a live finale two weeks ago held at Carnival City.

The voting percentages, audited by Deloitte & Touche, reveal that Karabo Mogane from Mbombela had a marginal voting lead over competitor Mmatema Moremi from Limpopo, garnering 54,97% of the total votes in the final week, compared to 45,03%.

In four of the 10 weeks however, Mmatema Moremi had a higher percentage - meaning she got more votes - than Karabo Mogane during the season which saw the overall number of votes jump from 24,3 million to over 78 million votes.

The latest completed season of Idols also pulled 16 million views to the official website, had 7,7 million video views and 1,6 million social media followers.

"The incredibly high quality of talent, their show-stopping performances and the fantastic production values of the series clearly resonated with our audiences," says Yolisa Phahle, M-Net CEO.

"Even the singers who didn't make it to the finale received unprecedented votes and we believe that Idols has been an amazing platform for all of them to start a great career in the music industry".

The judging panel for the 12th season of Idols has not yet been confirmed but auditions will start in January:

Durban, The Playhouse, Saturday 30 January 2016
Pretoria, The State Theatre,Saturday 6 February 2016
Johannesburg, Carnival City, Sunday 28 February 2016
Cape Town, Grand West Casino, Saturday 5 March 2016

Although M-Net and Mzansi Magic didn't give a definite answer when asked about it during the press conference two weeks ago following the conclusion of the season, it's looking increasingly likely that the 12th season of Idols will become a Mzansi Magic show only and leave M-Net.

Idols has been a co-production and was broadcast on both channels since the 7th season in 2011.

M-Net is now focused on The Voice South Africa which started filming the blind auditions and swivel chair phase last week at Sasani Studios in Johannesburg and will start on the M-Net channel at the end of January.

You can click on the image below to enlarge, see and study the weekly Idols voting percentages:

Shocking Broadcasting Amendment Bill from Faith Muthambi an 'illegal take-over of the SABC' as minister plans to turn SABC from a public to state broadcaster.

A Broadcasting Amendment Bill secretly being pushed through parliament by the ruling ANC government has been created to turn the SABC back into the Apartheid era state broadcaster it was before 1994.

The shocking Broadcasting Amendment Bill will change the Broadcasting Act, giving absolute control to South Africa's minister of communications to hire and fire SABC board members and the chairperson and will reduce the number of SABC board members.

The change will make the South African Broadcasting Corporation even more insulated and unaccountable to parliament or to the people of South Africa and instead only accountable and controlled by the South African president through proxy of the communication minister.

The shocking plan to hijack the SABC and to turn it into a state broadcaster comes from the controversial minister of communications, Faith Muthambi who has already overreached by directly intervening and firing SABC board members and now wants to place the SABC back under total state control which it was during Apartheid when it was a blatant National Party mouthpiece.

If approved and signed into law, the Broadcasting Amendment Bill will give the minister of communications in South Africa, in this case the highly unpopular Faith Muthambi, sole and total control over who to appoint, and when to fire, SABC board members.

It is exactly what she has been doing this year using the thinly-veiled disguise  and excuse of decimating the board saying she's doing so under the Companies Act because the SABC is a "state-owned entity".

The unstable SABC has been lurching from crisis to crisis with acrimonious in-fighting and instability on SABC board level as well as within its top-executive ranks, with the SABC and the government struggling to fill top-executive positions, SABC board member positions still vacant for months, as well as the position of the SABC chairperson.

Instead of a democratic process, Faith Muthambi wants to unilaterally take over the process since it's become too difficult to constantly replenish empty SABC board and SABC executive positions when people quit, are fired and leave in shame when they're exposed as having lied about qualifications like the disgraced former SABC chairperson Ellen Tshabalala.

The Broadcasting Amendment Bill,if passed will drastically reduce the SABC board members from 12 to just 9.

The Broadcasting Amendment Bill also seeks to reduce the quorum for voting on decisions from 9 to 7.

The president of the country, through the minister of communications will now appoint the few SABC board members that there will be instead of parliament.

The Broadcasting Amendment Bill also seeks to give the president and minister of communications the right to appoint an "interim SABC board" at will.

The Bill also specifies a new easier and much more unaccountable way for the re-appointment, firing and resignation of SABC board members.

Oversight of the SABC as a public broadcaster is reduced and taken away and the SABC is turned into a state broadcaster under control of the ruling president and that person's serving minister of communications.

The public pressure group for public broadcasting, the SOS Coalition says it will go to the Constitutional Court to challenge the shocking Broadcasting Amendment Bill.

"We are appalled that the minister of communications would seek, so brazenly, to transform our national public broadcaster into a state broadcaster beholden to the government of the day," says Sekoetlane Phamodi, SOS Coalition spokesperson told TVwithThinus.

"The SOS Coalition will take all necessary and available steps to oppose and challenge this move by the minister. The SABC belongs to the people of this country and, accordingly, it's board must be appointed by their public representatives in parliament in an open and public process."

Kate Skinner, independent broadcasting expert and Wits lecturer told TVwithThinus that "these amendments remove parliament and the public from the appointment process".

"This takes us full circle back to Apartheid. Here the public had no role in SABC appointments - the Broadcasting Act of 1976 stipulated that the president alone should appoint SABC board members."

"This is a betrayal of the ABC's post-apartheid vision for public - not state - broadcasting," says Kate Skinner.

"There is no room for this Broadcasting Amendment Bill in our democracy. It must be removed".

In a statement the Democratic Alliance (DA) political party says the Broadcasting Amendment Bill "is quite simply bad news for South Africa's democracy".

"It will see the last vestige of independence removed from the SABC, paving the way for it to become a ANC government propaganda tool under the control of Faith Muthambi."

"Along with the SABC Memorandum of Incorporation secretly signed by Faith Muthambi in September 2014 which gives the minister of communications the right to usurp the SABC board's powers reducing it to a mere rubber stamp, the Broadcasting Amendment Bill will give the ANC complete control over the SABC," says the DA.

"For South Africa's hard-won democracy to thrive, it is imperative that the country has a public broadcaster that is independent of government, free from political interference and presents news that is an accurate representation of conditions in South Africa."

"Any machinations to remove the independence of the SABC must be viewed as not only undemocratic, but also possibly, unconstitutional."

"The DA will vehemently oppose this Broadcasting Amendment Bill for the benefit of all South Africans who have a right to impartial news, not ANC good news stories and propaganda".

The South African Communist Party (SACP) is also vehemently opposed to the Broadcasting Amendment Bill and minister Faith Muthambi's shocking plan.

The SACP says the Broadcasting Amendment Bill will turn the SABC from a public broadcasting into a "corporate broadcaster". "The Bill will effectively make the SABC a company. All future minister of communications will have direct control over the SABC, instead of parliament".

The Inkata Freedom Party (IFP) is also strongly opposed to the Broadcasting Amendment Bill and shocked by the proposed plan to turn the SABC into a state broadcaster, calling the Broadcasting Amendment Bill "disturbing" and "an illegal take-over of the SABC".

The IFP is calling for South Africans to boycott the SABC and to immediately stop paying their SABC TV licences.

"We must unite, across political divide to save our public broadcaster," says the IFP in a statement.

"As a start, the IFP is of the opinion that citizens should lead a campaign of civil disobedience by not paying their TV licenses. If all else fails, the courts must be approached to stop this disastrous amendment bill from succeeding".

"The tabling of the Broadcasting Amendment Bill by the minister of communications will effectively turn the SABC into a state broadcaster," says the IFP.

"As things stand, the National Assembly, through the portfolio committee of communications, is part and parcel of shortlisting, interviewing and recommending candidates to serve on the SABC board."

"While the IFP has in the past lamented the fact that the SABC board appointment process is flawed - because the ANC uses its majority in Parliament to push though candidates of their choice - the current process does allow for opposition parties to negotiate and fight for the most qualified, independent candidates to be considered for these posts."

"However, if the broadcasting Amendment Bill is passed, the National Assembly will no longer be involved in appointing members to the SABC board. This will become the sole prerogative of the minister of communications."

The Economic Freedom Front (EFF) party slammed the Broadcasting Amendment Bill as "an Apartheid move".

The EFF calls the proposed change of the SABC from a public broadcaster to a state broadcaster under the control of the minister of communications "an anti-democratic, totalitarian move".

"This proposal demonstrates an uncontrollable desire by the ANC government to totalitarianism and be accountable to no one. The significant thing of any totalitarian government is total control of public broadcasting services coupled with suppression of all media freedom".

"Without the public broadcaster‚ held accountable by both parliament and cabinet‚ society only depends on corporate private broadcasters to hold politicians accountable," says the EFF.

"This Broadcasting Amendment Bill is therefore an Apartheid move‚ a fascist totalitarianism seeking to monopolise the running of the people's broadcasting services to government."

"Without parliament‚ people like the SABC's chief operating officer (COO) Hlaudi Motsoeneng‚ who are unqualified to hold positions they occupy‚ will be increased in the leadership of the SABC solely because they want to kill independent journalism within the pubic broadcaster and stop all criticism on the government of the day," says the EFF.

Disciplinary hearing of the SABC's COO Hlaudi Motsoeneng is suddenly back on from today after it was abruptly cancelled on Thursday.

The abruptly "adjourned" disciplinary hearing of the SABC against its highly controversial and famously matricless chief operating officer (COO) Hlaudi Motsoeneng is suddenly continuing today.

Hlaudi Motsoeneng's disciplinary hearing was supposed to start at the end of October, was then postponed to 1 December, was again postponed and only started on 2 December and lasted all of two days after it was abruptly cancelled.

During this period labour lawyer Sandile July was also fired as the lead prosecutor in the disciplinary hearing and replaced by the SABC with Mponyana Ledwaba as the SABC's pro-forma prosecutor.

On Sunday Hlaudi Motsoeneng's legal representation was told the disciplinary hearing is suddenly back on again and will be happening from Monday.

It comes after advocate William Mokhari on Thursday said the disciplinary hearing of Hlaudi Motsoeneng serves no purpose and would only be "academic" due to multiple ongoing court cases against Hlaudi Motsoeneng, and that the disciplinary hearing has therefore been cancelled.

The Public Protector in February 2014 in a scathing report entitled When Governance and Ethics Fail, implicated Hlaudi Motsoeneng in maladministration and abuse of power at the South African Broadcasting Corporation.

The Public Protector found that Hlaudi Motsoeneng lied about having matric and made up symbols for a certificate he knew he couldn't produce, said that he "should never have been appointed at the SABC".

Hlaudi Motsoeneng was implicated as having been involved in getting rid of everyone who testified against him in an earlier disciplinary hearing at the SABC, and his salary increased from R1.5 million to R2.4 million at the SABC in one year.

The Democratic Alliance (DA) political party said it will now proceed with contempt proceedings against the SABC.

"It is utterly preposterous to suggest, as the SABC now does, that two separate judgments, both requiring serious and immediate sanction of Hlaudi Motsoeneng, cancel one another out, having the result that he should return to work as COO."

"The suggestion is so absurd and baseless in law that it confirms that the SABC is hell-bent on ensuring that this disciplinary process is reduced to a sham," says the DA.

The SABC issued a terse statement on Friday, coming across as not knowing what to say.

"The SABC wishes to clear up any confusion following the adjournment yesterday [Thursday] of the disciplinary hearing against COO Hlaudi Motsoeneng," said SABC spokesperson Kaizer Kganyago.

"Pending the finalisation of the appeal process Hlaudi Motsoeneng is still the organisation's COO".

On Sunday Hlaudi Motsoeneng's lawyer, Zola Majavu, was told that Hlaudi Motsoeneng's disciplinary hearing is suddenly back on, following after the threat of contempt of court proceedings.

"The chairperson of the disciplinary committee was wrong," said Zola Majavu. "The SABC told us they are going ahead with the disciplinary hearing. There is no reason for the Democratic Alliance to threaten us with court".

The public pressure group for public broadcasting, the SOS Coalition, criticised the SABC for dragging out the disciplinary hearing process.

"The SABC board has treated the Public Protector with absolute contempt on this matter," Sekoetlane Phamodi, SOS Coalition spokesperson told eNCA (DStv 403) on Monday morning.