Broadcast Analysis South Africa – SABC
Our analyses measure whether SABC meets the requirements of the Broadcasting Act 4 of 1999, Section 6 (SABC Charter) and the BCCSA Code — whether news is reported truthfully, accurately, fairly, and whether all relevant positions receive space.
Here you will find 37 analyses from 4 SABC programmes — freely accessible as PDF. Each analysis covers 10 to 60 pages, is traceable to the minute and documents source selection, speaking time, framing and contextualisation.
Note: We deliberately show the strongest evaluations here. These are above the average of our analyses and represent the most notable cases in our database.
SABC Prime News —
| Date | Score | Topic | Report |
|---|---|---|---|
| The reports are currently under review and temporarily unavailable for download. | |||
SABC Cutting Edge —
| Date | Score | Topic | Report |
|---|---|---|---|
| The reports are currently under review and temporarily unavailable for download. | |||
SABC Face the Nation —
| Date | Score | Topic | Report |
|---|---|---|---|
| The reports are currently under review and temporarily unavailable for download. | |||
SABC It’s Topical / Unfiltered —
| Date | Score | Topic | Report |
|---|---|---|---|
| The reports are currently under review and temporarily unavailable for download. | |||
These analyses can serve as a basis for programme complaints under the Broadcasting Act and BCCSA Code: They show minute by minute where framing, omission or emotionalisation occurred.
For meta-analyses, large volumes and custom evaluations for research, newsrooms and parties, contact us:
Legal Disclaimer
- No factual determination
- The results presented do not constitute factual determinations about individual persons, editorial teams, or broadcasts. They are the product of a standardized operationalization, not a finding of individual responsibility.
- No legal judgment
- The aggregated deviation index does not replace a legal assessment under Broadcasting Act s. 6. The determination of whether a specific broadcast violates legal requirements is exclusively the responsibility of the competent authorities (in particular ICASA).
- No proof of causation
- Statistical correlations are not to be interpreted as proof of causal relationships or editorial intent. Deviation values may be influenced by topic selection, news environment, political controversy, or format logic.
- No judgment of intent
- The analysis measures observable structural characteristics of broadcasts. A score of 7 means a significant imbalance was detected — not that the editorial team intended it. The methodology makes no claims about motives or strategic objectives.
- Heuristic comparison tool
- The index serves comparative pattern recognition across thousands of broadcasts, not precise metric measurement of individual segments. Threshold values serve heuristic orientation, not sharp legal qualification.
- AI-Assisted Analysis
- This analysis was produced with the assistance of a large language model (LLM) and systematically cross-checked against original sources (transcripts, subtitles). The procedure is near-deterministic (temperature ≈ 0) but not fully reproducible. Criteria K10–K15 (soft facts) contain interpretive assessments that should be understood as analytical hypotheses.
- Speaking Times Are Approximations
- All speaking time indications are based on word count in the transcript (approx. 150 words/min.) and do not constitute second-precise measurements. They serve comparability across broadcasts, not as an exact metric.