Willemse saga: The festering boil
DEVELOPING NEWS: The Ashwin Willemse saga is a festering boil in desperate need of being lanced.
The latest developments – weekend newspaper reports that four more presenters accused SuperSport of racism – are symptomatic of the deeper putrefaction of the troubles at the pay-TV station.
According to reports, SuperSport presenters Owen Nkumane, Xola Ntshinga, Kaunda Ntunja and Gcobani Bobo have accused the broadcaster of racism, victimisation, pay disparity and intimidation.
This comes at a time when former Springbok Ashwin Willemse and his lawyer, Nqobizitha Mlilo, ramped up their battle with SuperSport over the former player’s decision to walk off set during a live broadcast back on May 19.
An initial inquiry into Willemse’s walkout stated that there was ‘no racism’ on the part of fellow presenters Nick Mallet and Naas Botha – ‘naked racism, subtle racism or otherwise’.
Willemse, who refused to participate in the review by Advocate Vincent Maleka because it was ‘not the right forum to air his view’, decided to go to the Equality Court – where he is planning to go head-to-head with SuperSport.
The additional charges brought by the four presenters – Nkumane, Ntshinga, Ntunja and Bobo – appears to add weight to Willemse’s argument.
Clinton van der Berg, Communications Manager at SuperSport, confirmed to rugby365 that they have received a letter from MVMT Attorneys, written on behalf of the four presenters.
“SuperSport has taken note of the letter,” Van der Berg said.
“The matter is being thoroughly investigated. The investigation is almost complete.
“SuperSport will communicate directly with the individuals concerned,” he concluded.
Willemse met with SuperSport management late last week, in the hope of reaching a compromise.
However, they appear no closer to a ‘settlement’ and the presenter’s lawyer, Mlilo, indicated that there is no ‘common ground’.
Mlilo is demanding the release of a second report, allegedly prepared for the company.
In an interview with public broadcaster eNCA, he said the meeting did not have a feeling of reconciliation.
“The meeting was almost meaningless,” Mlilo said in the interview.
The latest developments – including the letter from the four additional presenters, which arrived after Willemse indicated he was going to court – suggests there are many issues previously not brought into the public domain.
The letter further states that the presenters believe that certain roles are reserved for non-white presenters and that white contractors are paid more than black contractors.
They also suggest that these black contractors are expected to do more work.
They further stated that black presenters are subjected to victimisation, public humiliation, abusive language, intimidation and other inappropriate behaviour from management.
SuperSport’s media statements that there is ‘no racism’ and Willemse’s claims that the whole incident is ‘rooted in racism’ will take centre stage when the entire saga plays itself out in court.
* RELATED ARTICLES
AUDIO: No racism, as Ashwin ‘walks out’ again
Why Ashwin Willemse is going to Equality Court
Nqobizitha Mlilo
The SuperSport media release:
JUNE 19: SuperSport today published the outcome of the independent review into the May 19 on-air incident involving Ashwin Willemse, Nick Mallett and Naas Botha.
SuperSport appointed Advocate Vincent Maleka SC, a respected, independent professional, to review the allegations fully and objectively, after initial attempts to resolve the issue amicably and expeditiously by way of discussions with the presenters involved, did not resolve the issue.
Advocate Maleka conducted an extensive process and produced a comprehensive 50-page report, which will be made available in its entirety today.
Advocate Maleka attended to the following in compiling his report:
* Reviewing the audio-visuals of the live studio broadcast including footage which was not broadcast on the day and of prior broadcasts involving the three presenters
* Conducting separate interviews with role players including Naas Botha, Nick Mallett, the anchor on the day (Motshidisi Mohono), the Head of Production for SuperSport, the Executive Producer for rugby, the production manager of the broadcast (Mandla Ntsibande) and the CEOs of MultiChoice and SuperSport.
* Conducting on-site inspections which included visiting the studio and viewing a live broadcast in an Outside Broadcast van
* He also interviewed and consulted with Professor Adam Habib, an expert with extensive experience in race relations and considered literature on subtleties of racist conduct.
Ashwin regrettably decided not to participate in the review, despite the fact that all parties involved were advised of this process before it started and raised no objections at that time.
Advocate Maleka found the following:
* That the conduct of Naas and Nick during the off-air conversation with Ashwin and during the live studio broadcast of the post-match commentary of the match “does not manifest naked racism and was not motivated by racist considerations”.
* Assisted by Prof Habib, Advocate Maleka also found that there was also no evidence of Naas or Nick exhibiting either intended or unintended subtle racism.
* The incident cannot be explained on the basis of the suggestion or suspicion that Ashwin was, for the most part, not present in the studio when the second half of the rugby match was televised.
* There are two factors which provide a reasonable explanation for the incident. The first is the (mistaken) technical assumption that there was enough time for all the analyst to express their pre-match analysis or commentary of the Lions/Brumbies rugby match. However, the switch to the live broadcast happened sooner than anticipated. Consequently, there was no time for Ashwin to express his views. The panel then agreed, off-air, that Ashwin would be given the first opportunity to speak after the game. The second is that it is reasonable to assume that Ashwin may have regarded the common stance adopted by Nick and Naas as patronising when they insisted that he should thereafter speak first.
Advocate Maleka made a number of recommendations, all of which will be implemented by SuperSport:
* A forum will be established for the team of analysts to provide their views on the performance of the analysts (and possible room for improvement) during that specific broadcast, after each studio broadcast.
* A code of conduct will be formulated for analysts including grievance procedures and credible mechanisms to resolve any grievances they may have.
* Analysts will be required to operate the touch screen in the studio “across the colour-line”, even though the touch screen is the more complex of the functions on set.
* Counselling will be offered to Motshidisi, Naas, Nick and Ashwin due to the emotional suffering all have endured from and since the incident.
* SuperSport will take the additional step to refer the report to the SA Human Rights Commission.
Given the content of the report, it is expected that Naas and Nick will resume studio duties in the future, at a time to be determined by SuperSport.
While SuperSport is disappointed that Ashwin did not participate in Advocate Maleka’s review, it respects his right not to do so.
“In the spirit of reconciliation, I will make another attempt to reach out to Ashwin for us to find a mutually-acceptable way forward so that he knows that this issue has been fairly investigated.
Notwithstanding what has happened, one cannot forget that Ashwin reached the peak of international sport while facing very difficult circumstances and he continues to inspire many young people in our country. He represents the aspirations of many and I sincerely hope that Ashwin will respond positively,” concluded Gideon Khobane, CEO of SuperSport.
@rugby365com
* To read the full 51-page report, CLICK HERE!
