PBS Heads Struggle To Explain Chain Of Command In PN’s ‘Unfair Coverage’ Court Case
Top PBS officials struggled to explain exactly who took two decisions which led the Nationalist Party to open a constitutional case against them on the grounds of “unfair” coverage.
As the case continued today, the PN brought forward two examples to back up their argument that the national broadcaster has been “taken over” by the government.
One related to PBS’ coverage of the opening of the Marsa flyover junction in April 2021 and the second concerned promos of the 2022 Budget that were aired during news breaks in October and November last year.
In the flyover case, the BA ordered PBS to read out a declaration in May to correct its earlier coverage but it only did so in July, and this after the BA fined it for disobeying its orders.
With regards the Budget promos, the BA ordered PBS to play PN promos as well. PBS complied but played the PN’s promos in between two government ads for weeks, a decision which was fine with the BA but which the PN warned “neutralised” their message by sandwiching it between two government ads.
The PN’s lawyers – former secretary generals Paul Borg Olivier and Francis Zammit Dimech – struggled to find out who was actually responsible for these two decisions.
Executive chairman Mark Sammut said he didn’t get personally involved in either case, although he remembers “unofficially” disagreeing with the BA’s decision over the flyover coverage.
“Unofficially I disagreed with the decision because the launch of the Marsa flyover was news in the national interest, but I had no part to play at all in the editorial aspect and it wasn’t my remit.”
“According to the information I was given, my role is purely administrative and financial and I don’t get involved in editorial policies; I was always told it’s a no-go zone.”
Sammut insisted he has no idea what happened with regards to the Budget promos either.
PBS head of news Norma Saliba, who had full editorial responsibility of the station until December 2021 said the national broadcaster’s decision to challenge the BA’s decision on the flyover feature was taken by management.
However, she insisted she couldn’t remember who attended this meeting or meetings and whether Sammut was present, arguing that it was around a year ago and that she didn’t take minutes.
Ian Borg visits the Marsa flyover
“We discuss these issues at management level and not everyone is always present,” Saliba said. “Three months elapsed between the date the complaint was lodged and the date we broadcast the response… I think it was discussed more than once.”
As for the Budget promos, she said the newsroom doesn’t get involved in such issues at all.
PBS editor-in-chief and Chief Operations Officer Charles Dalli said he cannot respond to editorial decisions taken before his appointment as editor-in-chief last December, excluding him from responsibility of both the PN’s complaints.
With the newsroom heads stating they weren’t responsibly for the budget promos, PBS head of sales Ramona Mamo Degiovanni was called in and asked who was responsible.
After a lengthy back and forth, the PN’s lawyer established that this is the responsibility of the transmissions department, prompting them to summon Dalli back in to answer whether he was responsible in his capacity as COO.
However, Dalli dodged the questions again, stating that fillers are scheduled by PBS’ head of programming but not giving a clear answer when asked who ordered them.
At the end of today’s sitting, the PN’s lawyers expressed astonishment that after so many hours in court, none of PBS’ leaders could clarify who actually took the decision to air clips which, according to them, ultimately breached their right to free expression.
Cover photo: From left: Mark Sammut, Norma Saliba, Charles Dalli
Do you watch the news on PBS?
READ NEXT: One Shark Invests €200,000 On A Single Eye-Catching Project In Record Shark Tank Malta Deal
