Reveal the names of compromised journalists — or withdraw this slur against an embattled press
There’s a disturbing tendency among certain politicians to regard the press as an enemy and those who work in the industry as convenient scapegoats to be tossed about for the gratification of their supporters. They’re playing a dangerous game. The allegation by Angelo Agrizzi to the Zondo commission this week that some journalists were paid by Bosasa to not write stories about the company has merely fuelled the excitement of those who see the press as a monstrous creature whose power should be curbed. This issue needs clarification by the commission at its earliest convenience. If left hanging like a cloud, it could do enormous damage to the credibility of the entire press at a time when its role has never been more vital. These errant journalists, if they do indeed exist, should be unmasked. Agrizzi should name them and, if not, be forced to withdraw the accusation. The media needs enemies like a hole in the head.
No-one has done more to expose corruption and criminality in society, including the obscenity in Bosasa itself, than the media. It would therefore be unconscionable for members of the craft to be seen to have undermined such an effort. Such people are traitors to the cause.
The allegation, however unspecified, has come like manna from heaven to those whose interests are served by a toadying or sycophantic press. An independent press is a threat and an enemy.
But a free press has neither friend nor foe. Sometimes people detest the work a particular journalist may be doing and conclude that the whole notion of a free press is therefore a bad idea. The press is not the selfish preserve or fiefdom of journalists. It is a facility that seeks to serve the entire society; journalists and other practitioners are merely its temporary custodians. A free press is the true measure of a democratic society. Show me an unfree or pliant press and I’ll show you an autocratic or undemocratic society.
The first port of call for those who seek to oppress society is to deny or attack their people’s right to freedom of expression. As Benjamin Franklin said: “Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.” The free and unhindered circulation of news, views and ideas — good or bad — is the lifeblood of a robust democratic tradition, and an antidote to tyranny.
A press should not only be free from the government, business and other commercial interests, it should also be profitable. Otherwise its independence is likely to be affected as it cuts corners or compromises its values in a struggle for survival. He who pays the pipers calls the tune. The SABC, for instance, is caught betwixt and between as it vainly tries to ward off political control on the one hand and entice advertisers on the other. It ends up pleasing nobody, let alone its listeners and viewers.
It is only when the press is robustly healthy and free from interference from both political and private interests that it is able to play its requisite role in society.
That role is indispensable in a democracy. Which is why freedom of expression is the central pillar of our Bill of Rights. And without freedom of expression, our democracy would have been nothing but a sham. Those agitating against a free press or harassing journalists going about their legitimate duties must know that they’re not only going against the spirit of our constitution, they may arguably be coming close to breaking the law.
The ANC, which was instrumental in drafting the constitution, has come mighty close to emasculating it. At the Polokwane conference that elected Jacob Zuma president in 2007, the party also decided to introduce a bill in parliament to establish a tribunal to control what it saw as the excesses of the media. The measure has yet to see the light of day, thanks to vigorous opposition from civil society, though ANC officials threaten from time to time to resuscitate it.
But we now know that the ANC’s move against the media was part of an allinclusive strategy aimed at institutions seen as opposed to Zuma’s grand design to loot the country. The Scorpions were abolished and the National Prosecuting Authority, South African Revenue Service and other government bodies were thoroughly corrupted and used to benefit Zuma and his cronies.
President Cyril Ramaphosa hopefully won’t see any need for action against the press. Unlike Zuma, he has nothing to hide. As a former media owner himself and a key player in the drafting of the constitution, he obviously has a unique appreciation of the role the press has to play in a democracy. He’s also not one given to ranting against the press, and will therefore hopefully rein in the more excitable members of his party.
But Julius Malema and his sidekicks in the EFF seem to delight in bashing the press. They crave the limelight that the press affords them, but don’t like the bad publicity that often comes with it. The press has a responsibility to reflect what’s happening in society, warts and all. In fact, political parties themselves would be hard pressed to convey their messages to their supporters without the press. But it cannot be their bullhorn.
Political leaders should be careful not to glibly denounce the press, target or demonise individual reporters. Some of their supporters may just act on what they say. Words have consequences.