/ 15 January 2004

An SABC manifesto

Whereas the job of the media is generally to look outwards, the SABC is in the often unenviable position of having the glare pointed squarely at Auckland Park. So it was this week.

The corporation was in hot water with opposition parties for its decision to cover the African National Congress election manifesto launch jamboree in all its green, black and gold glory. It has also been asked by the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa to explain its decision.

That decision, or the execution of the decision, was wrong. Coverage came across as an occasion of state, with its treatment similar to that granted to occasions like an inauguration. Witness the wide panning shots of the ANC; the lingering camera on the flags and “Vote ANC” posters; Ngconde Balfour wriggling his substantial form about; the studio discussions …

The stated rationale for the broadcast was its news value — editorial managers expected a major policy announcement. That didn’t happen, as any regular watcher of policy could have guessed. With three-year budgeting, 10-year reviews, and a methodical hand at the Presidency, the guesswork’s been taken out of much policy formulation. With the the president’s State of the Nation address around the corner, Sunday’s occasion was never going to be anything more than a party rally.

Neither is it justified to say that because the election outcome is a foregone conclusion, the ANC president Thabo Mbeki’s speech became an important policy barometer. The principle remains: when party leaders speak as party leaders, that is how they should be treated.

In the kerfuffle that has followed, the broadcaster’s leaders showed an inability to distinguish between party and state; ironically a division that the ruling party has generally respected.

The SABC’s editorial managers, who planned the broadcast, are no Cliff Saunders, the infamous “journalist” who played a significant role in making the SABC the megaphone of the Bothas who once ran this country. The SABC is not the institution of old and has in the past decade or so risen to the challenge of making itself a relevant force in democracy.

That is why last week’s actions must be checked and its identity as a public broadcaster of the first order internally embraced and externally assessed. The general principles of fairness, equity and impartiality weigh more heavily on the broadcaster because it is publicly owned, a point that the Congress of South African Trade Unions and other civil society bodies make regularly.

The specific principles of election coverage, as set out in official regulations, are vital and set the bar even higher for the public broadcaster and the rest of the media. These officially kick in when the election date is announced, but the SABC would do well to begin applying them now and stick to the spirit of fairness.

Having set this precedent, the SABC is now duty-bound to cover at least the election manifesto launches of the major opposition parties (with due consideration, of course, to driving viewers and listeners to their remote controls).

As the hustings hot up, attention must be paid to the principles of equitable and fair coverage, which mean that all parties get coverage according to their size. It must also be recognised that the government will seek more publicity as its power is challenged; and that the opposition parties, too, will turn many molehills into mountains to get their few minutes of fame.

A water-stressed future

The insurance industry tells us drought is “an act of God”, implying that only the Almighty ( whether or not one believes in such a concept) is to blame. What is politically blameworthy, however, is the failure to provide for drought in a water-scarce country with a century-long record of cyclical dry and wet periods.

The last two serious dry spells were in 1982/83 and 1993/94. Ten years later, as if by clockwork, a great northern swathe of South Africa is again baking under pitiless blue skies. In the interim, nothing has been done to cushion agriculture or shield the rural millions who depend on boreholes and rivers for their domestic water needs and rainfall to feed their crops.

South Africa’s sophisticated infrastructure, and specifically the network of dams built under previous governments with Afrikaner farmers in mind, puts the country in a stronger position to withstand drought. In contrast with Zimbabwe, which has recklessly squandered its capital, we have the foreign exchange reserves to import staple foods in the event of drought-induced shortfalls. But staple food prices will inevitably rise, threatening food security in urban and rural areas. And officials warn that poor rains between now and the beginning of winter will leave the country critically exposed.

The longer-term picture is even more ominous. If we are indeed entering a dry cycle, we face a decade in which more years will be dry than wet. Many experts believe global warming will exacerbate climate instability, making both drought and flood more frequent and more intense. Others warn that Southern Africa’s water resources will be at full stretch in two decades. The issue has been allowed to drift for too long. Both the government and private agriculture have an urgent duty to plan for a water-stressed future.