Khaya Sithole: ‘Sarafina’ doesn’t have ‘Friends’ - The Mail & Guardian

Unlike in the United States, the way actors in South Africa are treated borders on exploitation.

2021-06-24 11:37:00 PM

Unlike in the United States, the way actors in South Africa are treated borders on exploitation.

Unlike in the United States, the way actors in South Africa are treated borders on exploitation.

Frasieramong others — the syndication phase has translated into enormous wealth for the key players who get paid residuals for as long as the show is aired.These benefits of syndication have eluded members of the creative industry in South Africa. Two years before

Mkhwebane loses first round against EC political heavyweights | Citypress Press Conference - The Decuplets Report Eskom to ramp up power cuts to stage 4 from Wednesday through to Friday

FriendsSarafinawas finally released in the United States in the week coinciding with the fall schedule of 1992.The timing of the release was affected by commercial and political factors. Earlier that year, the US had lived through the Los Angeles riots, which highlighted key issues relating to racial relations.

Sarafina,a movie seeking to tell a similarly resonant story from the perspective of South Africa, came at a possibly awkward time for a country still reckoning with the lingering effects of the riots. Nevertheless, the movie has remained popular and has become a permanent feature of the annual Youth Day celebrations in South Africa. For its actors, the annual revival of

Sarafinacomes with the annual reflection of how broken the financial arrangements are for the local industry. Every time the movie is re-screened in the country, it evokes memories of historic injustices, while perpetuating an ongoing injustice against those who receive no residuals from the re-running of the movie.

There may have been no bankable funders underpinning the industry, but the South African model has never found the right balance between the rights of producers and the rewards of the actors. As a result, many actors and support staff operate on the economic margins throughout their careers. 

The pandemic has almost killed off the sector and stalled new projects, exposing the fragility of the industry. The nature of their “freelance employment”, which is ad-hoc, irregular and unguaranteed, has resulted in the unintended effect of an income security vacuum. 

Although most traditional employees can participate in systems that help them between jobs — the Unemployment Insurance Fund in particular — actors do not readily participate in such schemes either because they are unaware of them or because they cannot contribute consistently when the basis for contribution — an income — is so inconsistent.

Tired of voting and frustrated with the ANC, Zandspruit residents deserve better | Citypress Bo-Kaap residents still not convinced by DA’s promises De Kock withdraws from SA team after refusing to take knee

Not only is the industry too fragmented to roll this out, there is also the reality that the gap between projects may be measured in years rather than weeks. Similarly, the post-employment benefit and income structures — pension and retirement annuity systems — that should have been the feature of

Shaleen Surtie-Richards’ life in her twilight years, are even more elusive for those whose entire career is defined by financial fragility at every turn.Such a market failure — that leaves the key players bordering on exploitation — invites lawmakers and regulators to intervene. Attempts to usher in reforms in the industry have become gridlocked in legislative chaos that has resulted in one instrument in particular — the Performers Protection Amendment Bill — remaining in limbo. 

The tension point behind this stalled process is there isn’t a clear explanation of what the points of irreconcilable differences — if any — actually are. Parliament, which once passed the bill, now wants to rescind it.Ironically, while the South African actors are still hoping for regulatory reforms that would enable them to benefit from the syndication model, the model itself is under the threat of the evolution of viewers’ habits. The ability of syndicated shows to make money is equally linked to the question of whether those who air the reruns can generate advertising revenues during the re-run. Although the amount commanded during the re-run will pale in comparison to the original airing of the show, the lower amount and almost nonexistent costs balance this out. 

But because viewers have many entertainment options — where each viewer is within touching distance of a cell phone, a computer and a TV set — and by extension the various options on offer, it has become a bit more difficult to figure out what viewers will choose first. Such a diversity of options has become even more acute during the pandemic. The lockdowns have resulted in people watching old content mainly because the lockdowns have affected the ability to produce new shows. On the other hand, the proliferation of multiple platforms has made the job of those who seek to sell advertising space on the basis of expected audience volumes much more difficult.

The question of who is a viewer and when they are viewing content is materially different from 30 years ago. And when many platforms allow the viewer to skip past advertisements, the question of whether the advert did register in the eyes and ears of the audience is more elusive.

But for as long as the syndication model exists, the great divide between actors associated with successfully syndicated shows and the rest is a wide gap. The divide between those who live in countries where regulators know what they are doing and those who don’t is even wider. 

Diepkloof residents protest over power IEC launches results centre | Citypress A wish list for the mini-budget | Citypress

Last month, the cast ofFriendshad their reunion. Since 1994, the show has generated $1.4-billion for its actors and producers. For the reunion show alone, each of the six actors were paid up to $5-million each.Two weeks later, the cast ofSarafinawas reunited on our screens. The big difference is that because they have no say in what happens to the movie, their consent was not required and they did not benefit financially as we reflected on the country’s history of marginalisation and exploitation. A remarkable irony.

Subscribe to the M&GThanks for enjoying theMail & Guardian, we’re proud of our 36 year history, throughout which we have delivered to readers the most important, unbiased stories in South Africa. Good journalism costs, though, and right from our very first edition we’ve relied on reader subscriptions to protect our independence.

Read more: Mail & Guardian »

eNCA Entrepreneurship Friday | 22 October 2021

eNCA's Rofhiwa Madzena speaks to Tshepiso Sibisi founder of Mwari Pizza House.

CoruscaKhaya You were once Weekly Mail and Anton Harber your editor?. I saw a recommendation about the works of Ethans_Maxwell and lots of investors keep saying reach out to him, I eventually did and it turned out to be truth and legit. Here he is 👉🏻 Ethans_Maxwell

Mayor vows to ensure Maritzburg United are not soldWhile Maritzburg United chair Farook Kadodia is still weighing up whether to sell the club, the Msunduzi municipality in Pietermaritzburg promised to help by getting local businesses to fund them. RealNevilleK

Royal AM claim legal basis for not taking the field in playoff against Chippa UnitedRoyal AM’s decision to not take the field against Chippa United in their promotion-relegation playoff match on Tuesday followed another letter sent to the Premier Soccer League (PSL) by the Durban team’s attorneys.

Mom of 'Thembisa 10' had not given birth nor was pregnant 'in recent times': Gauteng governmentThe mother of SA's so-called 'Thembisa 10' babies, Gosiame Sithole, has not given birth and was not pregnant 'in recent times', the Gauteng government said. Hebaann Tembisa not Thembisa please😳😳😳😳 😂😂😂😂😂

Mom of 'Thembisa 10' had not given birth nor was pregnant 'in recent times': Gauteng governmentThe mother of SA's so-called 'Thembisa 10' babies, Gosiame Sithole, has not given birth and was not pregnant 'in recent times', the Gauteng government said. South African media is crap! Kodwa why kudlalwa ngathi like we're bored

State sues over Tembisa decuplets storyGovernment spokesperson Thabo Masebe yesterday said it had not been established that Gosiame Sithole, the woman alleged to have given birth to the Tembisa10, was never pregnant in recent times. 😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂… Eh Piet is one of the best we have.. We were all just misled....... Even Social Development department were in deep, including Ekurhuleni Mayor At the time of publishing serious allegations against DoH, Piet knew the story was fake, that he had not observed editorial STDs & that's what is serious about DoH's case against him. He deliberately harmed their name.

SIU freezes R22-million in Digital Vibes accounts - The Mail & GuardianThe Special Investigating Unit said it would ask the tribunal to declare the health department’s contract with the company unlawful