The South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF) will be writing to the Department of Public Enterprises (DPE) to urgently request clarity on a supposed investigation into whistleblowers in the department.
Whistleblowers in public and private institutions are at the heart of unearthing corruption and malfeasance in government and the private sector. Journalists will not be able to expose corruption without their assistance.
It is concerning to note media reports that the DPE has allegedly initiated internal investigations aimed at unmasking whistleblowers. This follows reports about the qualifications of the department’s chief of staff, Ms Nthabiseng Borotho.
SANEF notes the DPE’s statement that these are not bona fide whistleblowers but corrupt individuals using whistleblowing to divert attention from the department’s efforts to investigate wrongdoing. We will be seeking clarity from the department.
The Protected Disclosures Act no 26 of 2000 makes provision for procedures in terms of which employees – in both the public and private sector – who disclose information, are protected from occupational harm. We believe that these principles need to be upheld.
Thuma Mina WhatsApp Group
SANEF is concerned about a disinformation campaign on social media, seeking to link senior journalists, including SANEF members, to President Cyril Ramaphosa’s “Thuma Mina” campaign.
The campaign centres on a WhatsApp group set up by Government Communication and Information System (GCIS) staff and named after the “Thuma Mina” service delivery programme (as opposed to the same name of the ANC’s election campaign).
According to information in SANEF’s possession, the group comprised a wide range of journalists from most media houses and it is purely used to share government information and press statements. It is one of the hundreds of WhatsApp groups that the government, political parties and private organisations use to disseminate information to journalists.
There is nothing nefarious or underhanded about the group and SANEF calls on those spreading disinformation about journalists to cease doing so.
Note to Editors: The South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF) is a non-profit organisation whose members are editors, senior journalists and journalism trainers from all areas of the South African media. We are committed to championing South Africa’s hard-won freedom of expression and promoting quality, ethics and diversity in the South African media. We promote excellence in journalism through fighting for media freedom, writing policy submissions, research and education and training programmes. SANEF is not a union.
The South African National Editors Forum (SANEF), the Southern African Editors’ Forum (SAEF) and the African Editors Forum (TAEF) welcome the release on bail of Zimbabwean journalist, Hopewell Chin’ono. We note that Justice Chitapi found that Magistrate Gofa grossly misdirected herself in denying the journalist bail. He is expected to be released from Chikurubi Maximum Security Prison later this evening.
SANEF, SAEF AND TAEF call on Zimbabwean authorities to stop hounding Chin’ono, an investigative journalist and documentary filmmaker. Instead we call for his unconditional release.
Chin’ono was arrested and then again re-arrested on 3 November and is facing charges of defeating or obstructing the course of justice. The authorities have alleged that Chin’ono created communication lines with sources within the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) who gave him access to confidential prosecutorial deliberations, which he allegedly published on social media, including Twitter, on 25 October.
The confidential information purported to show that Henrietta Rushwaya, a Zimbabwean woman allegedly caught at the Robert Mugabe International Airport trying to smuggle gold out of the country, was going to be granted bail without any opposition by NPA officials.
Prosecutors claimed that Chin’ono had jeopardised the integrity of cases against himself and that of Rushwaya.
Chin’ono has declined to reveal his sources – which is a basic principle of journalistic ethics.
Chin’ono is also facing charges of “inciting the public” after he was arrested in July for allegedly calling for anti-corruption protests. At the time, he had been involved exposing government corruption.
SANEF joins international media organisations and defenders of media freedom including the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), Amnesty International, the Africa Editors Forum (TAEF) and the Southern African Editors Forum (SAEF) in condemning the pretrial detention over a tweet, which represents what some see as the latest effort to control social media in Zimbabwe.
SANEF, SAEF and TAEF join media organisations in appealing, once again, to Cyril Ramaphosa in his position as African Union chair, to use all available mechanisms to help secure Chin’ono’s release, and to ensure that journalists across the continent are respected as essential workers throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, and are not jailed for their work.
Chin’ono’s detention was the latest tactic to target and harass critical voices through the misuse of the criminal justice system.
Addressing the International Press Institute Congress in Cape Town in February 1994, Nelson Mandela said: A critical, independent and investigative press is the lifeblood of any democracy. The press must be free from state interference. It must have the economic strength to stand up to the blandishments of government officials. It must have sufficient independence from vested interests to be bold and inquiring without fear or favour. It must enjoy the protection of the constitution so that it can protect our rights as citizens.”
We hope that the Zimbabwe authorities will heed his counsel.
Note to Editors: The South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF) is a non-profit organisation whose members are editors, senior journalists and journalism trainers from all areas of the South African media. We are committed to championing South Africa’s hard-won freedom of expression and promoting quality, ethics and diversity in the South African media. We promote excellence in journalism through fighting for media freedom, writing policy submissions, research and education and training programmes. SANEF is not a union.
The South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF) held cordial meetings on Thursday (19 November 2020) and Friday (20 November 2020) with SABC editors and executives respectively to find a way forward in the current impasse facing the public broadcaster.
SANEF notes that the SABC board announced late on Thursday night that it was suspending the restructuring process by seven days to allow for further consultation.
News reports have indicated that media unions are going ahead with strike action that threatens a blackout of broadcast and digital services at the public broadcaster.
SANEF has proposed a mediated process to both management and editors to try and resolve the impasse, as the instability in the news division at the public broadcaster threatens its ability to deliver on its expansive, but sadly unfunded public mandate.
The SABC delivers news in all 11 official languages across the country and two San languages, Khwedam and !Xuntali, and it is the only institution with regional offices, ensuring that rural and marginalised communities are given a voice. In parts of our country, it remains the only source of information for communities. It, therefore, remains central to South Africa’s ability to ensure thriving participatory democracy.
It was clear to SANEF that none of the parties dispute the critical need for the SABC to restructure and cut costs. A bloated, top-heavy structure is the unfortunate consequence of years of mismanagement, including the payment of above-inflation and irregular increases and bonuses. All parties agree that for the SABC to be saved, costs must be cut.
In our meeting with editors on Thursday, they indicated that they remain committed to the restructuring of the SABC to ensure its sustainability and ability to continue to deliver on its constitutional mandate.
But they expressed frustration that there was not sufficient consultation on the proposed structure and indicated that there were gaps in the structure presented that could impede operations directly linked to delivering on its public service responsibilities.
The SABC executive, led by Group CEO Madoda Mxakwe, explained that Treasury conditions on the bail-out it received included reducing its salary bill, which currently represents more than half its revenue and 43% of its expenditure. In the news division alone, 93% of the budget is spent on salaries.
Management also warned that should the turnaround strategy not be implemented, the SABC will run out of money by April. SANEF is of the view that urgent action must be taken to avoid this situation, that will be to the detriment of millions of South Africans.
The SABC executive reiterated its commitment to continue to deliver on the SABC’s constitutional mandate despite the lack of funding from the shareholder.
SANEF believes a mediated process between the newsroom and the management team will allow for the management team to share with the editorial staff the vision for the SABC and explain the difficult choices it had to make as part of safeguarding the sustainability of the SABC.
The editorial team will be able to share with management its proposals on ensuring that while the inevitable restructuring process is carried out, there are no gaps that threaten operations.
FUNDING THE PUBLIC MANDATE
SANEF is however concerned that the SABC’s critical public mandate has never been funded sufficiently by the government despite promises over the years to do so.
Instead, there has been a reversal of support to the SABC.
For example, the SABC was not given extra funding to cover the 2019 national and provincial elections. The public broadcaster played a critical role in giving voice to ordinary South Africans and gave the opportunity for political parties to share their manifestos with the public.
The SABC plays a critical role in informing and educating the public on pandemics like Covid-19, especially in a climate where audiences turn to credible media outlets for factual news.
In the week after the National State of Disaster was declared, the average audience for IsiZulu language TV news on SABC increased by 40% and IsiXhosa news audience rose by 60%.
The pandemic has had a disastrous impact on the finances of all media companies, including the SABC, again highlighting the need for proper government funding of the public broadcaster.
Government and political parties cannot speak about the importance of the SABC but fail to provide it with the necessary financial support to execute that mandate.
Note to Editors: The South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF) is a non-profit organisation whose members are editors, senior journalists and journalism trainers from all areas of the South African media. We are committed to championing South Africa’s hard-won freedom of expression and promoting quality, ethics and diversity in the South African media. We promote excellence in journalism through fighting for media freedom, writing policy submissions, research and education and training programmes. SANEF is not a union.
The South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF) is concerned about the instability at the SABC after the announcement of impending retrenchments.
As part of its turnaround strategy, the SABC announced this week it would retrench 400 of its almost 3,000 employees. Newsroom staff are also affected. Apart from the lay-offs, the SABC also stated that it would freeze salary increases for the next three years.
Earlier in the year it forecast that it might have to lay off 600 jobs for its own survival. The SABC’s salary bill represents more than half its revenue and 45% of its expenditure.
SANEF calls on the SABC leadership to continue to fulfil its public mandate by ensuring that its budget cuts do not curtail a number of critical services including its African language and regional programming. We call for the SABC to ringfence core news and current affairs posts and not compromise its core public mandate of news delivery.
SANEF will be seeking a meeting with the SABC to get a deeper understanding of its restructuring plans and its vision for the future of the public broadcaster. We note that Section 189 notices to the newsroom staff have temporarily been withdrawn.
Since President Cyril Ramaphosa declared the Coronavirus pandemic a national disaster on 23 March 2020, more than 700 jobs have been lost in the media industry. In the first two months of the lockdown we saw the closure of two magazine publishers and 80 small print publications operating across the country.
SANEF notes with deep concern that in many newsrooms around the country, journalists are simply not replaced, resulting in a diminished capacity to cover the length and breadth of the country. With the prevailing tough economic conditions, advertising revenue has declined dramatically, and the bulk of digital advertising revenue leaves the country’s shores to Facebook and Google.
It is not just the COVID-19 crisis that has decimated the media sector. In the past three years, scores of journalists lost their jobs due to retrenchments by the then Tiso Blackstar, Media24, Independent Media and the shutdown of Afro Worldview, previously known as ANN7, by MultiChoice. Titles like The Times and HuffPost SA were closed, which diminished the diversity of voices in South Africa.
We call on media owners to think creatively and responsibly about implementing new, sustainable business models, built on the integrity and the trust that our readers, viewers and listeners place in us to tell the country’s stories without fear or favour.
Note to Editors: The South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF) is a non-profit organisation whose members are editors, senior journalists and journalism trainers from all areas of the South African media. We are committed to championing South Africa’s hard-won freedom of expression and promoting quality, ethics and diversity in the South African media. We promote excellence in journalism through fighting for media freedom, writing policy submissions, research and education and training programmes. SANEF is not a union.
Johannesburg – When one of my favourite broadcasters, the late Jim Lehrer – of America’s Public Broadcasting Station, was asked if he had day-to-day guidelines for practising journalism, he said: “Well, yes, and here they are: “Do nothing I cannot defend;
“Cover, write and present every story with the care I would want if the story were about me;
“Assume there is at least one other side or version to every story;
“Assume the viewer is as smart and caring and as good a person as I am. Assume the same about all people on whom I report;
“Assume personal lives are a private matter until a legitimate turn in the story absolutely mandates otherwise;
“Carefully separate opinion and analysis from straight news stories and clearly label everything;
“Do not use anonymous sources or blind quotes except on rare and monumental occasions and
“No one should ever be allowed to attack another anonymously. And, finally, I am not in the entertainment business.”
Essential elements of journalism
Every time I read this, I remember my first journalism lecture at Rhodes University in Makhanda, when we debated the essential elements of reporting:
Accuracy
Truthfulness
Objectivity
Impartiality
Fairness
Accountability
It is sad to see that in this day and age, some journalists ignore ethical standards as espoused by Lehrer – may his soul rest in peace – and the professional standards we learn from journalism schools which are emphasised by concerned editors.
Forty-three years since one of the implementers of apartheid white minority rule, Jimmy Kruger, arrested editors and banned The World and Weekend World, and 26 years into a democratic South Africa, is the state of media freedom in our Rainbow something to be proud of?
No.
While there are no threats to the freedom of the media as there were 43 years ago, the state of the media industry is as messy and more confusing due to the ever-changing business models, diminishing capacity of news organisations, declining profits, fake news, misinformation, the over-reliance on unnamed sources and declining public trust.
Ignoring ethical guidelines
It is a pity that these days, some news sounds or reads more like a biased commentary which has more opinion than facts.
Some journalists ignore ethical guidelines for the sake of sensationalising the news in the quest to be seen as hard-hitting newsmen and women.
Of course, journalism has seen a sudden shift because of the advent of blogs and social media platforms like YouTube, Facebook and Instagram, as well as the overwhelming urge to promote one ideology over another.
Despite the shift to digital media and more competition for advertising and print newspaper sales and circulation, ethical decision-making and journalistic integrity, should remain steadfast.
Unfortunately, we continue to see the media spin narratives to serve their own interest by using cherry-picking stories, using compromising pictures, taking content out of context, or promoting misleading headlines and relying – sometimes over-relying on anonymous sources.
Use of anonymous sources
In addition to sensationalising news for commercial and political gain, journalism ethics is suffering from the growing use of anonymous sources. Amid journalism scandals and hand-wringing about media credibility, the use of anonymous sources has run amok.
When I was trained as a reporter, editors insisted that we always strive to get both sides of every story. We were never allowed to publish unconfirmed rumours or to quote unnamed sources.
Now, all the rules have changed. The 24-hour news cycle, growth of online news, competition for audiences, viewers and listeners, means unnamed sources are used increasingly to break stories leaked by officials seeking to get their views before the public.
Rumours by anonymous sources are tossed into the air or headlined in print, to be proved or disproved later.
Of course, there is an argument that anonymous sources are an essential tool of investigative reporting. Used well, anonymous sources are an indispensable tool for supplying depth and critical insight to complicated stories.
For intrepid journalists, one needs to answer two facts about the source:
* Does the source actually have all the facts and knows what he or she is talking about, and or,
* Does the source have a hidden political or economic agenda and/or an axe to grind?
Scepticism of unnamed sources
I can think of no common journalistic shortcoming more threatening to media credibility than over-reliance on unnamed sources.
I am not surprised that members of the public are often sceptical of unnamed sources. Almost invariably people assume that any quote without a name attached to it was made up by the reporter.
Indeed, while readers are sceptical of anonymous sources, sometimes they are necessary. In deciding to use them, the value of the information they divulge must be weighed against the credibility questions that anonymity raises.
Of course as human beings, journalists may fall short of reader expectations. That doesn’t make the mistakes or thumb-sucking stories alright.
Everyone knows that sometimes the information may be sensitive but important enough to make anonymity acceptable.
To offset any public doubt, instead of just identifying someone as an “unnamed source,” or a “source who declined to be named,” the editors need to explain the sources’ motives for coming forward and what qualifies them as being credible. For instance, the journalist and his or her bosses may note what position the source holds in an organisation or company.
Also, for an unnamed source to carry weight, the information must be so important, the media house may not be able to get it anywhere else. Also if known, the source would face harm or serious loss.
No wonder news organisations and individual reporters value unidentified sources so much that they go to great lengths to protect their identities.
Guidelines for using anonymous sources
One may say surely there is a big divide between whistle-blowers and run-of-the-mill anonymous sources who freely bash political and/or business opponents.
That is why the world-famous newspapers, The New York Times and Washington Post have outlined guidelines for helping journalists decide whether to use anonymous sources. These guidelines are:
* Promises of anonymity must be authorised by the editor;
* Anonymous sources should be used only for a just cause;
* Anonymous sources should be used only as a last resort;
* Sources should be as fully identified as possible, with reasons for anonymity explained in the story;
* Proportionality: editors should balance the potential harms and benefits in any use of anonymous sources;
* Anonymous sources can only be used with just intentions by the reporter, the media and the source; and
* Use of anonymous sources requires independent verification by a second source.
* Unnamed sources or not, a true journalist must be able to display professional ethical standards unswayed by inherent human frailties such as political or business allegiance which may make one vulnerable to ethical lapses.
Rigorous self-criticism
Therefore, the media fraternity should strive for a rigorous self-criticism over any perception of irresponsibly forsaking professional morality.
In their book, Doing Ethics in Journalism, authors Jay Black, Bob Steele and Ralph Barney pose three ethical standards for journalism:
* Seek truth and report it as fully as possible. Be thorough, accurate, and fair).
* Act independently. Avoid outside influences that would compromise the credibility of the reporting.
* Minimise harm. Reporting does not occur in isolation. The effects of reporting can cause harm, often unintended.
Is anyone listening?
There is no doubt that the duty of the media is to shape the mind and the opinion of the public.
Maybe it is time that the public demand professional and higher standards from the media industry by boycotting media companies that have journalists who do not adhere to the expected ethical standards.
* Rich Mkhondo runs The Media and Writers Firm (www.mediaandwritersfirm.com) a content development and reputation management hub.
The inaugural Aggrey Klaaste Annual Colloquium was held on the 19 October 2020. The Colloquium was aimed at celebrating the courageous spirit of all those journalists and activists who spoke out against apartheid and helped nurture a people’s desire for freedom on 19 October 1977, the infamous Black Wednesday.
In addition to reflecting on Black Wednesday and its aftermath, the colloquium sought to address pressing issues currently facing the media in contemporary South Africa. Watch the discussionshere
The National Press Club, in partnership with Unisa and the Qoboza Family, hosted the 10th Annual Percy Qoboza Memorial Lecture on Monday, October 19th.
The lecture is held annually in remembrance of 19 October 1977, when the apartheid government banned the World, Weekend World and other publications and organisations in what came to be known as Black Wednesday.
The lecture honours Percy Qoboza, the editor of The World and a critic of the apartheid regime and is a reflection on media freedom.
The theme this year was: “Why journalism matters. The challenges have changed but has its core purpose?”
The lecture was presented by Pippa Green, SA Press Ombudsman. Read the lecture here
The South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF) joins media houses and advocacy groups around the country in commemorating Black Wednesday – the day in October 1977 when then Minister of Justice, Jimmy Kruger ordered the arrest of editors and the banning of 19 Black Consciousness organisations and several anti-apartheid newspapers such as the World and the Weekend World.
Several events were held today and more will be held later in the month. They included the 10th Annual Percy Qoboza Memorial Lecture (Qoboza was the editor at the time of The World newspaper); a webinar discussion on fake News and disinformation by the Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA) as well as the Aggrey Klaaste Trust’s first annual colloquium on “Surviving 2020 and Media Credibility Going Forward”.
SANEF notes that although South Africa is in a far better position in terms of media freedom compared to those dark apartheid days, the media industry still faces serious challenges including journalists being harassed by police and communities when covering protests.
On Friday, for instance, SABC news journalist Reginald Witbooi was threatened by ANC members in Senekal during a LIVE crossing. A number of other journalists were also harassed by EFF supporters including Graeme Raubenheimer, also from the SABC and News 24’s Pieter Du Toit. Since the Senekal Case started, Citizen journalist, Marizka Coetzer and photographer, Tracy-Lee Stark were assaulted and their equipment damaged when a crowd of approximately 1 000 farmers protested outside the court against the murder of 22 year old Brendan Horner on Tuesday afternoon.
SANEF Chairperson, Sbusiso Ngalwa says a lot more work still needs to be done to educate all sectors of society about the crucial role the media plays in strengthening democracy. Ngalwa also points to the serious financial problems faced by the sector.
Says Ngalwa, “With COVID-19, we have seen publications close down, we have seen companies announcing mass retrenchments, and we have seen no less than 700 journalists losing their jobs during this period.”
“So, the reduction in the number of journalists and media houses has a direct influence and direct threat to efforts to spread the news and ensure a free flow of information.”
The impact of COVID-19 on the media sector led to SANEF establishing a Media Relief Fund, which was launched in July to assist journalists financially. We are happy to report that due to the goodwill of individuals and donors and the generosity of corporate South Africa, the Fund is a few thousand rand short of R5 million – SANEF has so far raised R4 870 067. The initial seed funding of R500 000 was contributed by MTN SA. Standard Bank and the Open Society Foundation for South Africa (OSF-SA) are the latest two organisations to contribute a million rand.
SANEF used the first phase to offer emergency relief to pay out a total of R1 135 000.00 to 227 beneficiaries. The second phase closed on 30 September and is currently under adjudication. SANEF will launch the third phase shortly.
With further funding, SANEF is hoping to support other projects to assist the sustainability of small, independent media institutions across the country, through a variety of targeted interventions.
Note to Editors: The South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF) is a non-profit organisation whose members are editors, senior journalists and journalism trainers from all areas of the South African media. We are committed to championing South Africa’s hard-won freedom of expression and promoting quality, ethics and diversity in the South African media. We promote excellence in journalism through fighting for media freedom, writing policy submissions, research and education and training programmes. SANEF is not a union.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorised as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyse and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. Opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always active
Necessary cookies are essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Analytics
Analytics cookies are used to track user behaviour on our website. We process these cookies to understand user engagement and improve user experience on our website.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.