IN an industry where “perceptions are everything”, M-Net was entitled to protect its reputation and commercial interests and not keep Gareth Cliff on as an Idols SA judge, said the pay-TV provider in court papers
M-Net made its decision to axe Cliff after he weighed in on the furore over a racist Facebook post by the now infamous estate-agent Penny Sparrow, then himself becoming the subject of controversy and accused of racism.
In her post, Sparrow likened black people to monkeys, lamenting their being “allowed loose” onto public beaches because it “invited huge dirt and trouble and discomfort to others”.
Responding to a Twitter poll on whether Sparrow’s remarks were hate speech or were protected under the Constitution, Cliff tweeted that “people don’t understand free speech at all”.
Later, responding to an accusation of racism, he said: “This woman is an idiot and a racist, but I believe in freedom of speech.”
Cliff said that by firing him, M-Net had breached their contract and defamed him. It had made him a “sacrificial lamb” to protect its commercial interests, he said.
But in an affidavit filed in court last Friday M-Net’s chief executive officer, Yolisa Phahle said M-Net was entitled to act as it did and had done nothing unlawful.
“Arguably the national debate that ensued after the comments made by Penny Sparrow and others was one of the most controversial and acrimonious in recent history,” Phahle said.
“Cliff’s comments had provoked a massive reaction and calls for a boycott of the show. The reaction was mostly negative, according to a report prepared by a social media research company. The report said that in the week that followed 55% of twitter users were critical of and only 3% supported him.”
Phahle added: “Mr Cliff’s subsequent apology did not change public sentiment, which remained negative. In relation to its brand image, and with less than a month to go before the start of the 2016 Idols SA auditions, M-Net felt that it could not afford to become embroiled in the political and racial controversy surrounding the applicant’s statements.”
The M-Net boss said Idols SA judges had changed over the years and that it was not a foregone conclusion that any judge would be kept on the following season.
While there were negotiations, there had been no contract between Cliff and M-Net yet, not even an oral one, as he had alleged. Phahle said material aspects such as what he was to be paid had not been finally agreed, she said.
Cliff however claimed there was an oral contract based on the previous season’s contract. But if this were so, this included a clause allowing M-Net to terminate on a week’s notice with no reasons necessary, said Phahle.
She also denied that M-Net had defamed Cliff saying: “Any harm done to the applicant’s reputation is a direct result of his own statement.”
Addressing Cliff’s allegation that he had been treated differently to fellow Idols judges who had also made social media blunders, she said the incidents were “clearly distinguishable”.
“Unathi Msengana didn’t post a profanity on Twitter, as claimed by Cliff. She sent a direct message which was then published by the receiver,” said Phahle.
“The Facebook post by Somizi Mhlongo – in which he criticised racist white South Africans for hiding behind the #ZumaMustFall campaign – used ‘unfortunate’ language,” added Phahle.
“But it was directed at racist white South Africans, not at white South Africans generally. The context was also ‘entirely different’. Cliff chose to enter the fray in the midst of an acrimonious national discussion and made statements that even he admitted were insensitive and ill-advised.”
Phahle also made it clear that Idols SA judges were appointed to entertain and delight the public, not to shock and offend them.
“It was appropriate to end the relationship,” concluded Phahle.
– BDLive