Media Monday - hot topics and topics that make us hopping mad! 11 April 2011
Posted: 11 April 2011 | News - Newsletter | Categories: Democracy and Governance, Media Freedom and Performance
On the menu this Media Monday Bulletin!
- Secrecy: what Avusa and SABC have in common!
- Mail and Guardian bares all – ethically speaking!
- Patting media on the back.
- Media and politics – is media just a pawn?
- Media Matters: a proven forum for media debate!
- And our newest MMC!
Media: secrecy vs. transparency
Over the past two weeks the world of social media was abuzz following an article by journalist Michelle Solomon in The Daily Maverick: "Sunday Times and me”. Solomon served the media house, Avusa, with Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) application following the group’s refusal to make public a Sunday Times report document “said to detail the systemic gate-keeping and policy failures of the Sunday Times newsroom”. The Promotion of Access to Information Act of 2000 facilitates applications for information from public institutions and private companies in certain situations, for example to protect or exercise a person’s Constitutional rights.
According to Solomon, only the report’s executive summary of 900 words was published and the rest of it buried by Avusa and Sunday Times staff. The summary spoke of problems in the Sunday Times newsroom which were apparently the “root cause of inaccuracies that saw the weekly paper forced to make some embarrassing high-profile story retractions in 2007 and 2008”.
At the time of the article going to publishing, Solomon was still awaiting a response from Avusa regarding her application. PAIA application procedures allow Avusa 30 days to release the document, refuse the application, or ask for an extension.
The article itself has been tweeted directly from The Daily Maverick’s website 111 times, and has been re-tweeted many times over. In the hours and days after it was published, issues surrounding the hidden report made for interesting online discussions.
This saga rings a bell though, as is somewhat of an action reply of one of the battles between the public broadcaster SABC and the Mail and Guardian newspaper. According to the newspaper’s article titled “Inside the SABC blacklist report”, the SABC appointed a commission in 2006 to investigate allegations of blacklisting of so-called anti-government political commentators by the broadcaster.
The Mail and Guardian then accused the SABC of violating the Commission’s recommendations , and only releasing a summary of the findings... déjà vu anyone? The newspaper got hold of a copy of the original SABC report and put it up on their website. Sadly the link seem to have been removed from their website). The paper also quoted the Commissioners calling for their report to be released. It never was of course, and the then SABC Group CEO Dali Mpofu actually threatened to sue the Mail and Guardian!
We hope that Michelle Solomon’s efforts yield a better result. But it is interesting to remember though that Avusa is not the first media organisation to err on the side of secrecy! Public service broadcasting, clearly does not necessarily equate to public’s right to know. And all this before we get a new Protection of Information Bill!
Mail and Guardian Editorial Code of Ethics
Still on secrecy versus transparency, the Mail and Guardian published its Editorial Code of Ethics last week; a move welcomed by industry critics. The media house committed itself “to the highest standards of independent journalism” and to serving “the public's right to know, in line with section 16 of South Africa's constitution which guarantees this fundamental right in order to allow citizens to make decisions and judgments about their society”.
Also thrown into the mix was a pledge to exercise its role with great care and responsibility and to have the public’s trust in their integrity. The Code was built around the concepts of fairness, accountability, minimising harm, and accuracy.
Media monitoring NGO, Media Monitoring Africa (MMA), applauded the Mail and Guardian and its staff for the transparency and their high regard for journalism. MMA (@MMA-tweeter) said on Twitter “Well done to @mailandguardian and @NicDawes for great editorial code of ethics http://bit.ly/fy46oX #zamediafreedom #mediamattersza”.
Media Matters also gives the thumbs up to the Mail and Guardian for baring it all so that it can be held accountable in line with its Editorial Code of Ethics in future. And for all that Avusa has been in the eye of a storm over its transparency and credibility, it must be said that it also has its own excellent set of editorial policies, which commit its newspapers to ethical standards, above and separate from the press code.
Sure we critique the media but we have to ask, what other bodies – public or private, media or otherwise, have shown such a willingness to commit to standards above and beyond the bare minimum required of them? We would also like to see more institutions follow suit and publish codes of ethics, so the public can judge their performance and hold them to account Tell us which other institutions you would like to see come up with ethical guidelines, and why?
Media doing well!
Exactly ten years ago today, a tragedy occurred during a soccer match at Ellis Park Stadium in the heart of Johannesburg when 43 lovers of the beautiful game lost their lives following a stampede. It was one of the much anticipated matches between two Soweto football giants, Kaizer Chiefs and Orlando Pirates, as it had always been historically, and the stadium was packed to capacity when the unthinkable occurred.
Ten years on, The Star newspaper banner at the top of its front page read “ELLIS PARK SOCCER STAMPEDE: 10 YEARS AGO TODAY” to commemorate this sad event. Below that is text saying “We remember the 43 who died at Ellis Park that night”, and goes on to direct the reader to the following pages inside for more. The related story in page 3 is about the dismay over Premier Soccer League’s (PSL – the country’s football league) stance in not commemorating the 10-year anniversary of this tragedy.
Media Matters would like to pat The Star on the back for remembering and giving this issue such prominence.
Still in our generous mood, we would to congratulate all of the media organisations who kept the story of Fusi Simon Mofokeng and Tshokolo Joseph Mokoena wrongful imprisonment on the agenda. The two men have just been released after spending 14 long years in jail for a crime they did not commit! The Wits Justice Project (WJP) which is now aiming at exonerating the pair worked for 20 months to demonstrate the pair’s innocence and secure their release from prison.
The two are said to have spent 14 years in prison after being falsely accused of involvement in a murder that took place in the Free State, and the WJP has been helping the men since 2009. Over the last number of months a number of media organisations have covered this story and keeping an issue like this on the agenda is surely what good journalism is all about. So next time you are thinking bad things about the media, try and remember that they also played a crucial role in setting two innocent men free. The media gets a round of applause from us!
Political headlining: is media the pawn in the political game?
These days it appears we’re bombarded with political headlines day in and out, and they’re frequently followed by denials by politicians or parties concerned. In the wake of The Star’s Malema misquote debacle and in the run up to the local election, one must ask the question: Is the media being played, or is the media getting it right?
Take the ANC cases for instance…
The Sunday Independent reported about divisions within the COSATU-SACP marriage over succession, both factions rubbished the claims and called them a ; “campaign sought to sow division and mistrust, and to pit the two organisations against each other”. So which was it?
The Sunday Independent recently reported an alleged plot to unseat President Jacob Zuma by various top ANC politicians. According to report on the same topic from Pretoria News, the source of the claim was from an investigation into police commissioner Bheki Cele.
A number of names were thrown into the mix as being the alleged conspirators, but a few of them including KwaZulu-Natal Premier Zweli Mkhize, Human Settlements Minister Tokyo Sexwale and Arts and Culture Minister Paul Mashatile denied the allegations. Sports Minister Fikile Mbalula also refused to comment on the matter.
Another report to throw into the mix is one from The Sunday Times this past weekend. It published a front page story about corruption and mismanagement by Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs Minister Sicelo Shiceka. The Sunday Times reported on official documents showing the minister spent large sums of public funds in hotel stays, which the minister disputed.
If this is true and can be backed up by valid proof, then the newspaper is on the money and deserves accolades for the expose. But if it cannot be proven and backed up, then the stage will be set for another of many rounds of the media vs. politician bout.
A recent case in point was The Star and Daily Sun’s usage of what turned out to be a fabricated quote in their reporting of Julius Malema. What followed was a series of apologies and accusations, calls for investigations and claims about self-regulation being a “threat to democracy,” all of which formed fuel for the “Media Appeals Tribunal” fire.
Is the media being used as a pawn in the political game? How can the media ensure that they are not being played by politicians and shoot themselves in the foot in the process, and that they get their stories right? To what extent is there a level of truth to all these claims that later get denied by politicians? Now is the time for media to be courageous, yet very very careful!
The media debate: Do people care?
Clearly there’s been no shortage of media topics up for discussion over the past week. What we also found interesting was the level of debate that these issues generated, over coffee, in the office and of course online. Of course we have a vested interest here – the give away is in our tag line: “Media Matters – Debating South Africa’s Media.” We were over the moon last week at the level and extent of the media discussions taking place and that continue to take place on our facebook and twitter platforms and all around us in the online social media universe at least.
Media Matters Commentators and enthusiasts were slugging it out over a whole range of topics, among them whether Avusa should air its dirty laundry and why, and the merits and demerits of self-regulation and what alternatives are out there. And while we encourage journalists to get stuck into these online pow-wows, we think it’s brilliant, and perhaps even more important, to see a whole range of people, outside the realms of politics, journalism or academia, adding their voices to the debate.
Angelo Coppola (angelo2711) raised a crucial issue when he tweeted us saying:
“@mediamattersza I'd like to suggest that the SA public doesn't give a toss about the freedom of the media or the related debate.”
That these debates may be considered uninteresting or irrelevant to many was one of the key motivating factors in setting up this very project – because clearly we disagree. We want everyone’s input, and we want people to care! Now not even a year old, with over 1000 followers on twitter and 800 facebook fans, we feel we’re just getting started. We’re aware that the online platforms we use can only reach so many people. Nevertheless we believe we’re off to a good start, and that people are using us as a place to vent, express themselves and ask for other people’s contributions on a whole range of media topics and that’s what it’s all about folks! But we want to grow bigger and better. So if you’ve an idea about what we could do to include more people, to get people telling us what they think, or maybe ways of extending it beyond articulation to action, we want to hear it!
In the meantime here’s a collection of thought provoking comments that we’ve selected from our Media Matters Commentators and enthusiasts that indicate to us that some of you out there, quite a few of you in fact, care about media, its impact and the whole spectrum of related issues! Please, please keep it up!
Here’s our pick of the last seven days:
ORapscallion Odin Rapscallion
“@MediaMattersZA Well just the threat of MAT has already started to have the desired effect... which shows up the shortcomings of selfreg”
cobusfourie Cobus Fourie
“@MediaMattersZA I've been incensed by a major media company but in hindsight I would not want to gag them, consequences are too far reaching”
Murrayingram Murray Ingram
“This "satanist" murder story doing the rounds in the press is lame. Sensationalism at best. You can do better #SApress @MediaMattersZA
Re Avusa:
ModdityDodds Knut Cayce
“@MediaMattersZA @mishsolomon @muzhunter Organisations often generate documents not intended for publication. That is their right to privacy.”
And for contributions in more than 140 characters on Facebook!
David Bullard says we "Twitterers" from the "parapets" who kept on "cheering" Michelle Solomon on Twitter for challenging Avusa Media for its "dirty linen" 2008 Report on the Sunday Times newspaper "will disappear and leave [her] to face the music alone if things turns ugly". To what extent is he, Bullard, correct? Looking forward to comments from all MMCs and Media Matters followers...
The development of community media and radio in particular in Africa has been propelled by the activism of its members. From the onset a continental body was formed - AMARC Africa and through this body and other institutions like PANOS - people could learn the experience of each country and develop ways in which govts could be lobbied to change legislation in order to allow formation of community radio stations in different countries. So in a way I agree with Kadiri that activism could help. Howevern the activism has to cut across - it can't be media organisations or journos alone that embark on this task.
Knut Cayce Fostering understanding and acceptance through knowledge of another's culture & language is a laudable aim, but the proposal to reintroduce mandatory language studies has ignited all the old prejudices.
And our MMC for this week!
Odin Rapscallion (@ORapscallion) is a self-confessed chronic contrarian and cynic, “a consumer of media and an ordinary member of the public”, who has shared his views on a range of societal issues, with media being the latest one. He has engaged with us and other Media Matters Commentators and enthusiasts in interesting debates and discussions especially on our Twitter page. The most recent of which were his tweets, and indeed links to his blog entries about the merits of an MAT and the agendas behind the debate.
Tweet