South Africa’s community broadcasting sector is facing mounting financial pressure, with millions of rand owed to Sentech.
Dozens of community radio stations have terminated their services and now there is a concern that the very system used to measure radio audiences is failing to adequately capture large parts of the sector.
The details emerged in a parliamentary reply to a question by Tsholofelo Bodlani, which provides a rare glimpse into the financial and operational pressures confronting community broadcasters.
According to the reply, the average monthly cost of broadcasting fees charged by Sentech to a community radio station is R19,682.
The reply states that active community radio stations owe Sentech R22 million while closed community radio stations account for a further R67 million.
It also reveals that Sentech has taken action against stations that failed to meet their financial obligations.
“Due to non-payment of services by community broadcasters, SENTECH terminated services to 42 community radio stations,” Minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni said in a written parliamentary reply.
The parliamentary reply also points to a significant number of community broadcasters operating through self-distribution rather than using Sentech.
However, the regulator, ICASA, said it could not conclusively determine whether stations were migrating because they could no longer afford Sentech’s services.
“The Authority (ICASA) is not in a position to provide the reasons why stations elect to migrate to self-distribution as they do not expressly outline this information when submitting applications to self-provide,” Ntshavheni said.
The financial difficulties facing community broadcasters are further compounded by their dependence on advertising revenue and the ability to attract that revenue depends heavily on reliable audience data.
According to Ntshavheni the audience ratings for community broadcasters are measured through the Radio Audience Measurement Survey under the auspices of the Broadcast Research Council of South Africa.
But she acknowledges a serious limitation in the current system.
“The most recent audience ratings data for radio broadcasters was published by the Broadcast Research Council of South Africa (BRC) in March 2024,” she revealed.
“The MDDA notes that the current audience measurement framework does not adequately represent the full diversity of the community broadcasting sector, particularly in rural, township and peri-urban areas,” she continued.
That admission goes to the heart of the sustainability crisis confronting community radio.
Community stations rely on advertising to generate revenue. Advertisers, in turn, want reliable information about who is listening.
But if the audience measurement system does not adequately represent rural, township and peri-urban broadcasters, stations operating in precisely those communities may struggle to demonstrate their value to advertisers.
The result could be a vicious cycle. Limited audience data affects advertising revenue, limited revenue makes it harder to meet operating costs and financial pressure then contributes to debt, service termination or closure.
The Minister said that addressing the problem would require substantial additional funding.
“To improve the representatively and reliability of audience measurement for community broadcasters, additional research funding of approximately R15 million per annum would be required.
“The MDDA does not currently have the financial resources to fund such an intervention. The Agency is therefore engaging with stakeholders in the community media sector, the Government Communication and Information System (GCIS), the BRC and advertising industry stakeholders to explore collaborative funding mechanisms,” she said.
Whether those engagements will result in a new and properly funded audience measurement system remains unclear.
The figures contained in the parliamentary reply raise broader questions about the future of community broadcasting.
The combined debt owed by active and closed stations represents a significant financial burden, but there is little public information about how much of that debt is recoverable, how long it has accumulated or how many active stations remain at risk of disconnection.
The termination of services to 42 community radio stations also raises questions about whether government and regulators have a clear picture of the consequences.
Community radio is often the most accessible source of local news, public information, language-specific programming and community debate, particularly in areas where commercial broadcasters have limited local presence.
The loss of a station is therefore not simply a business failure. It can mean the loss of a local platform for information and participation.
The parliamentary reply also provides insight into how the MDDA distributes funding to beneficiaries.
According to the response, “The MDDA disburses funds directly to beneficiaries for grants approved by the Board through the Agency’s funding call process. In certain instances, the MDDA may make direct payments to suppliers or service providers for approved project-related goods or services to ensure that grant funding is utilised for its intended purpose,” the Minister said.
That raises further questions about the circumstances in which suppliers or service providers are paid directly, how those suppliers are identified and what safeguards exist to ensure transparency and accountability.
This paints a picture of a sector facing pressure from several directions.
Community broadcasters owe millions to their transmission provider. Forty-two stations have already had services terminated because of non-payment. Some stations are operating through self-distribution, although the regulator says it cannot determine why they made that choice.
At the same time, the MDDA acknowledges that the audience measurement framework does not adequately represent much of the community broadcasting sector while saying that it lacks the money required to fix the problem.
The lingering question is, whether these are isolated problems being dealt with separately by different institutions, or symptoms of a much deeper crisis in the funding model of South Africa’s community broadcasting sector.
