First published in the Daily Maverick 168 weekly newspaper.

The long-awaited SANEF-commissioned report on media ethics and credibility has surfaced, with some far-reaching recommendations. But the report, which is more than 300 pages long, has one big flaw, or gaping hole, or lacuna, to use legal parlance, if you like: the Independent Newspapers group was hardly covered. This is the country’s biggest print company and it does not belong to the Press Council of South Africa.

The impetus for the inquiry into ethics and credibility was The Sunday Times debacle of three sets of stories between 2011 and 2016: the SARS “rogue unit”, the Cato Manor “death squads” series and the Zimbabwe “renditions” pieces – for which it had to retract and apologise. The Sunday Times, which subscribes to the Press Council, abided by the Ombud’s decisions and its then editor, Bongani Siqoko, apologised in 2018. The brief to the panel was to cover all news media (except for the SABC, which was already engaged in an inquiry) and not just The Sunday Times.

Heading the panel, retired Judge Kathy Satchwell, with her panellists Nikiwe Bikitsha and Rich Mkhondo, answered questions at the launch/handover on Monday about why there was no significant consideration of Independent Newspapers (The Star, Cape Argus, Pretoria News etc.). Absent, too, were the media panel’s ideas on how to deal with “rogues” – those who left in 2016 and now do not subscribe to the Press Code. In other words, the big question remained unaddressed: how do you have a credible journalism industry when such a large portion does not subscribe to the Press Code (of Ethics)?

The disquieting news is that whereas journalists from Independent Newspapers and others who had previously worked there provided information in interviews, they wished to remain anonymous and their stories could therefore not be documented in the report. Consequently, the shenanigans of the Independent Newspapers group as told in these “testimonies” have not become public. But was there not another way the panel could have dealt with this? For example, describe the issues without identifying the sources? Or quote extracts from Paper Tiger by Alide Dasnois and Chris Whitfield? There were poignant moments when the panellists described what was taking place in many newsrooms, particularly the “Indy”. Mkhondo stated: “What saddened me the most was to hear the fear, anxiety; there were disturbing stories of conditions that journalists are working under…” Bikitsha said: “Threats are from within, the media companies themselves create the toxic environments.”

Satchwell was insistent that if these stories were told, those who told them would be further victimised. When asked what her big takeaway from this inquiry was, she replied: “The media’s role in a democracy and the importance of self-regulation.”

Factionalism, splits, rogues and social media

When your country is in a precarious shamble, how can its journalism not reflect that, to some extent, at least? SA provides the context for its journalism. The context is, of course, a split in the governing party, factionalism, corruption, unemployment, poverty and the now delayed Covid vaccination rollouts. SA’s ruling bloc is divided into two factions, and a small section of journalism seems to be captured by political forces, i.e. media capture.

Then there is the complicating external force wrought by technology and social media and this, therefore, begs the question: who is a journalist in the age of social media and misinformation? A talk show host full of opinions, a newsreader who also reads out ads on radio (702), a citizen who blogs and sends opinions to websites, a person who tweets all day long?

This tangled web for the new age of journalism lies on the back of huge losses of revenue in media companies, failing business models and job cuts in newsrooms. This was already rife in the past decade, in the pre-Covid era, so do spare a sympathetic thought for the maze the panel stepped into.

The report contains various descriptions of different types of ethical breaches by journalists: there are many instances of not giving enough time for the right to reply, a few brown envelope cases, attempted bribery by politicians in the case of the Sunday World, a few plagiarism issues, siding with political factions, and then there is the “revolving-door” syndrome (moving from newspaper to government, back to newspaper, to private company spokespersons and back to media company).

According to Satchwell, none of these incidences cumulatively is of such a bleak nature to conclude that we have an unethical or corrupt media. However, in my view, it’s a serious gap that Independent Newspapers was not singled out and tackled head-on, in a way that could still protect sources.

Besides the issue of The Sunday Times (Arena Holdings) being given too generous a space in the report and the Independent far too little, the crises of the SABC (for instance political interference and musical-chair boards) were not covered because the broadcaster was not included in terms of reference. It would have been useful to have included a summary of the recent inquiry into the SABC in which Joe Thloloe, who headed that report, wrote about editorial interference and how “staff were gripped by anger and fear”. However, other companies featured in the report also show worrying trends of management interference: eNCA (the several cases involving Kanthan Pillay, who also launched a political party), Primedia and some freelance journalists, including the revolving-door syndrome. DM168

This story first appeared in our weekly Daily Maverick 168 newspaper which is available for free to Pick n Pay Smart Shoppers at these Pick n Pay stores.