Twice in two months The Star undermined superb quality journalism by publishing an image of identifiable vulnerable children alongside it. This merits a MAD.

“A stable helping hand, please” (The Star, 04,10,2010, p.11) was an article based on the piece “Aids orphans tourism: A threat to young children in residential care” by Linda Richter. It highlighted the problems associated with “voluntourism,” where wealthy well-meaning tourists from the developed countries come for short periods of time to work with vulnerable children, often in orphanages.

According to Linda Richter “the formation and dissolution of attachment bonds with successive volunteers is likely to be especially damaging to young children… the weight of evidence suggests that these activities are not in the best interests of children”

However this thought provoking piece of comment and analysis was undermined by the use of an un-contextualised image showing vulnerable children, which was published alongside it. The image was taken from a high angle, literally looking down on a group of children who were holding their hands out in what appeared to be a pleading or begging gesture. Their faces could be clearly seen.

The caption that accompanied the image read: “Volunteers’ short-term attachments can make things worse for orphans, who can end up repeatedly abandoned, say the writers.”

This reader was therefore led to believe that these children were orphans, and that, in the context of a piece that deals with “Aids orphan tourism”, these children were orphaned as a result of Aids. Identifying children in this way leaves them vulnerable to stigmatisation, and is not in their best interests.

Independent Newspapers has signed up to Media Monitoring Africa (MMA)’s Editorial Guidelines and Principles for Reporting on Children. They make clear that “the best interest of each child is to be protected over any other consideration” and that “the informed consent of a child and parent or caregiver should be sought in all cases where the identity of a child is to be disclosed”

Under the guidelines for using images of children, they state that “dramatic images of children used without context and for gratuitous value not only lose much of their impact but can also violate the rights of the children involved.”

The image is credited to Siphwe Sibeko and Reuters. It is probable that this is a stock or library image, and was chosen for dramatic effect.

If consent was indeed sought from the children, it ought to have been sought for use in this specific context. And even if informed consent was obtained, it would still have to be in the best interests of the children involved for the image to be used. MMA believes that this image fails that test.

Alongside “Doctors call them Thabo’s children” (The Star, 5,11,2010, p.17) was another example of an image of an identifiable vulnerable child, which in MMA’s view, ultimately undermined the strength of the article it accompanied. What is even more disappointing is that The Star was given a MAD in September 2009 for publishing the same image.

In “Doctors call them Thabo’s children” managing editor of Health-e News Service Kerry Cullinan challenges former Director General Frank Chikane’s defence of Thabo Mbeki’s response to Aids in South Africa.

The accompanying image was first published alongside another Health-e News article “Without ARVs life looks bleak for HIV/Aids patients” (The Star, 21,08,09, p.8).

From correspondence with the journalist on that occasion MMA found out that the child in the photograph was HIV positive and died just days or weeks after the photograph was originally taken. It is also MMA’s understanding that informed consent was obtained from the mother for the image to be used alongside the original article.

Nevertheless a child has a right to dignity and privacy both in life and in death. While the child’s mother may have believed it was in her child’s best interests to be identified at the time the photo was taken, that is very different from a newspaper using this image more than a year later to symbolise the plight of HIV positive babies. This fails to recognise the humanity of this child.

Children are afforded special protection both in law, and in the editorial guidelines adopted by The Star because they are the most vulnerable members of our society. The Star must ensure that images of children are only used when it is in their best interests, and not because they will illicit sympathy from its readers.

MMA has chosen not to provide links to the images, as to republish them would similarly fail to respect the rights of the children involved.