Far too often our media are made the scapegoats for all manner of leader’s errors. If a politician says something stupid, they blame the media for quoting them out of context. If they expose things they should not, the media are accused of going on a witch-hunt or some variant. It is essential that in those instances we defend the media and their right and responsibility to hold the powerful to account.
Not quite as frequently, however, media are their own worst enemy, and do things to reinforce every negative stereotype about journalists and media you can think of. This week the Sunday World was responsible for a clear example of bad journalism. Their headline story, “Masebe’s Polygamy Secret” is not only poor journalism, but given the context, it was, also, an awful violation of a parent who is grieving the loss of a child. Apparently for the Sunday World it is news that a prominent person in a polygamist marriage gave birth to a child. Sounds a bit ordinary doesn't it, and you can be forgiven for asking what the public interest in sharing that information could be? Well apparently the information needed to be revealed as the person has been "sitting on a startling secret like a broody hen for at least two years.”
Again you can still be forgiven for wondering why this is news, or why I am bothering with this piece. Ordinarily gossip about celebrities makes Sunday tabloids. It has become a common trend for celeb "news" to be carried on page three of many of our newspapers. What makes the story noteworthy is that in addition to it having no discernible public interest element, it is also contradictory. The page headline, “Masebe’s ‘secret’ exposed” is apparently that she had a child with a man who is already married. The “secret” is then exposed, and directly contradicted in a bold quote in the story, where the Sunday World’s own “mole” told them, “the fact that you didn’t know about this does not mean it was a secret affair.” Pretending now we are not dealing with news, but only gossip, where is the actual gossip anyway?
Ok, so you have an open secret dressed up as gossip making a headline story about a celebrity. Again, it is not that uncommon for newspapers to get these things wrong, think Trevor Noah and Dead Relatives. Luckily, in that instance, the facts were quickly determined, and no real harm was caused to Trevor Noah. In the current instance this is not the case.
In addition to the non-gossip focus, the story was written and accompanied by images from the funeral of the young boy who had drowned only a week ago. Again, quite why the child’s tragic death would have any impact on the “gossip” is a spectacular leap in logic. It clearly cannot be seen to be relevant to the journalists who state in the story, that “the actress ignored our calls and text messages”. No really. So a mother has just lost her child, the journalists seem surprised that the mother – who was not sitting on a secret – did not want to return their calls. I don’t know about you, but I think if I lost one of my children, the last thing I would be worrying about would be media trying to ask me about a non-story piece of gossip.
What the story does achieve is to perpetuate the notion that media and journalists are un-caring, intrusive and invasive. No regard appears to be shown for family who just lost their child, or indeed the accuracy of the report. Again it is not simply a case of shoddy journalism, it violates basic principles of journalism. The South African Press Code Preamble clearly states:
“Our work is guided at all times by the public interest, understood to describe information of legitimate interest or importance to citizens.
As journalists, we commit ourselves to the highest standards of excellence, to maintain credibility and keep the trust of our readers. This means always striving for truth, avoiding unnecessary harm, reflecting a multiplicity of voices in our coverage of events, showing a special concern for children and other vulnerable groups, and acting independently.”
A simple reading of the Preamble to the South African Press Code shows how it violated almost every element. No attempt is made to minimise harm, no attempt is made to report the truth as fully as possible, and no attempt is made to demonstrate a public interest. The only form of excellence demonstrated by this story, is an excellent example to others on how not to have a headline story.
Equally concerning however has been the newspaper's response, which has been pretty much silence. Again, a clear violation of the basic ethical principle of journalism – to be accountable. We call on the Sunday World to immediately withdraw the story, remove it from their website, apologise to the family and Florence Masebe, and then to their readers. DM