politicians
It seems there may be some kind of inverse correlation between the popularity of political parties and public figures in the media on the one hand, and with the public on the other. At the very least the issue would provide fertile ground for research for a PhD thesis!
During the 1994 elections, most of the English-language newspapers supported the Democratic Party. It garnered about 2% of the vote. Now the media, overwhelmingly, support the governing party, but electoral support for the DP has grown exponentially!
It is probable that in the 1999 elections, unless the Inkatha Freedom Party merges with the African National Congress, electoral support for the ANC will decline slightly from the previous general election.
In the United States, despite prurience, intrusiveness, scandal-mongering and contempt on the part of the media in its dealings with President Bill Clinton, he is now one of the most popular presidents in the history of that country.
In Britain, despite 30 years of sustained ridicule directed in the media against the royal family, it is more probable that Prince William will end his days reigning as king than as a citizen of a republic. In Zimbabwe, the slavish support of the media for Robert Mugabe has made neither journalists nor politicians more secure.
In the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, sycophantic endorsement of communist governments by the media did not prevent their overthrow. And so one could go on.
Although some of my best friends are journalists, it seems that part of the explanation may lie in the fact that, in the view of the people, journalists are an even lower form of life than politicians (or even lawyers!).
Whatever the explanation may be, it seems clear that politicians should welcome, rather than resent, criticism in the media. – Nigel Willis, Johannesburg
Consistent courage
A free press is one of an ever-decreasing number of reasons why I remain in South Africa. Your courage and integrity displayed in the old era continue into the new … and I believe you are likely to have a battle on your hands. I salute you. – Richard Motet
Don’t penalise us
Who is going to be the next high-profile personality to jump on Dr Nkosazana Zuma’s pathetic bandwagon against the tobacco industry, so obviously designed to show that her salary is not a mind-blowing waste of taxpayers’ money?
First there was Mel Miller, who, despite conceding that he knew smoking causes lung cancer, nevertheless carried on doing it for 40 years because he didn’t know it was addictive.
Now we have Robert Kirby and his two back-up friends, the respected attorney and the criminal-law professor, who believe that South African Breweries is criminally assaulting children by advertising its products (Loose Cannon, February 27 to March 5)! Well, if it’s true, by all means lay a charge and prove it in court.
I suppose it is now just a question of time before a personality comes off second best in a road accident caused by a driver chirping on a cellphone, and then it will be curtains for cellphone-makers as well.
In the meantime, permit me to make a plea on behalf of all the millions of South Africans, both adults and children, who, like me, feel no pressure whatsoever to smoke cigarettes, drink beer or own cellphones.
Don’t penalise us for the weakness and stupidity of the relatively few. Leave us free to continue enjoying all those magnificent sporting events that will undoubtedly no longer take place if the lethal-product manufacturers are barred from sponsoring them. – NJ Marks, Sandton
Liberals for the pot
Tony Leon’s party, a national icon of opportunism, suggests that I, too, have embraced opportunism (Letters, February 27 to March 5). I rebuff this flattering recruitment effort.
The Democratic Party’s grandiloquently named ”research department” knows not the DP itself, let alone the broader country. After ”a careful search of our files”, the department found only two innocuous references to foreigners.
But actually, as The Citizen reported last year (during what wags might dub the ”Machel Affair”), the DP unambiguously queried the ”policy” of ”a foreigner [Graa Machel] representing South Africa at official functions”. Additionally, were the research department more competent than pompous, it would know of DP health representative Jack Bloom’s complaint (The Citizen, February 6) about sending medical students to Cuba for ”training in a foreign country which is of uncertain relevance”.
”Liberal” xenophobia thrives.
Unable to see a brink without tripping over it, the DP heroically attempts to rescue the term ”carpetbagger” from its pro-slavery origins.
This emulates PW Botha’s recent redefinition of ”apartheid” as ”good neighbourliness”, ignoring historical reality. Even right-wing journalist Paul Johnson (who wrote last year that New York’s Gay Pride March made him fear for his children) grudgingly accepts, in his recent History of the American People, that carpetbaggers were idealistic reformers, not merely unscrupulous opportunists.
But in the DP pro-slavery historiography and neo-apartheid privilege alike thrive. ”Carpetbaggers” were uniformly ”opportunist”, like Nelson Mandela was ”terrorist” – in white supremacist propaganda.
Incidentally, Herman Giliomee called me a ”foreign carpetbagger”; Ken Owen a ”West Indian” one. Has the research department discovered a fundamental distinction between attacking ”foreigners” and attacking ”West Indians”?
Attempting to disprove liberal bigotry, the DP proves it anew. To it I am ”demented”, and ”fevered imaginations” inhabit Shell House. To Leon, Kader Asmal is on ”steroids”. To Owen, Thami Mazwai is ”congenitally furious” and William Makgoba is ”bruised”.
Like colonial missionaries, today’s liberals are threatened by angry and diseased natives. Owen wails that South Africa has ”more HIV sufferers than English whites”. Even the courageous Helen Suzman thinks liberals ”an endangered species”. Seems you are destined for my cooking pot. – Ronald Suresh Roberts, Johannesburg
Camel cartoon please
After the somewhat premature and triumphalist hubris of your Zapiro cartoon and given your unwavering commitment to journalistic balance, I expect to see a front page cartoon of a camel doing the dirty to a springbok forthwith. – Mike Davies, Harare
Please stay, Jomo
This is a letter of support to Jomo Sono. I have watched Sono play soccer from an early age. As a teenager I learned to admire him even more. My household was always divided in two when it came to soccer – my mother, my five brothers and myself being the supporters of Orlando Pirates (Mabakaka), and my grandfather being a Kaizer Chiefs fan.
Anyway my love for Sono’s courage, hard work, integrity and professionalism has never failed me. In essence, I am trying to say: ”Jomo, we need you, the nation needs you, and the world needs you. You have come a long way with us. You have led this ship when it was sinking. So please don’t stop paddling the boat, otherwise Bafana Bafana will drown. Don’t quit!”
I’ve been in the United States for the past four years and believe you me I cannot afford to miss the news about home and soccer keeps me going. I was more than thrilled when you took over the cream of our nation. So please don’t disappoint us! Stay, we love you! – Patty Moeng
Immaculate failure
Well, at least we have the comfort of knowing that the South African cricket selectors fielded the best team possible for the second five-day international against Pakistan. It helps to know that each player was chosen on merit. No development players to sully their immaculate lack of success. – Mark Hermans, North Pine
Publish the proof
That Tony Stirling (correct spelling, not yours) was a soft touch for the police is recorded in an official document which has been doing the rounds for years. Stirling was in the category of journalists who were useful to the security police. There are people in senior political positions today who were also useful in that way. Were they also spies in your view?
If you have proof, however, that he was formally a spy, with a handler, who worked for the security police for reward or as a volunteer, it would be useful if you published that proof.
If you wanted to call him a spy you should have done so while he was alive. – Peta Thornycroft, Kensington
Wild speculation
The title of Robert Kirby’s column, Loose Cannon, is no doubt a way of pre-emptively excusing his abuse of poetic licence when he speculates wildly about facts. May we correct some of his misrepresentations (February 27 to March 5) of the Centre for Applied Legal Studies’ (Cals) role in Buang?
The idea for the series originated with the Department of Labour which commissioned the SABC to produce it. Cals was commissioned to do two things: to ensure the correctness of the information on the Labour Relations Act conveyed in the scripts provided by the producers, and to amplify the limited educational content of each episode by compiling brief synopses of the episodes and the associated law. Cals did not co-produce the series.
The purpose of the programme and synopses is to raise awareness of the Act among the broader public, and to provide additional information on selected aspects. Whatever the merits and demerits of the Act may be, we believe that efforts attempting to promote a wider understanding of the law should be supported.
Summarising an episode and the law on discrimination may not make gripping reading, but was never intended as anything more than supplementary information on the legal issues. Regrettably, it may not be as riveting as Kirby’s tiresomely predictable sense of humour.
Incidentally, all the characters do have surnames, contrary to Kirby’s observation. – Robert Lagrange, Centre for Applied Legal Studies Labour Project