/ 25 November 2005

July 14 – July 20 2006

Campus racism insidious

Auditors Deloitte have found that there is no racism at the University of KwaZulu-Natal’s medical school (July 7), only “small incidents, which appear to be nothing more substantial than personal differences, or wrong perceptions, or misunderstandings …” Case closed, let’s get on with it!

The problem here is one of perspective, because for someone for whom it is not a daily lived experience, racism is defined in concrete terms. There has to be a big sign at the door that says “No Blacks”, or a darkie has to be pulled behind a van in broad daylight.

But racism is more insidious in contemporary South Africa. Its power derives from creating a hostile, dis-abling environment for one group, while facilitating success for another.

I can’t speak for UKZN, but I studied at the Pretoria University medical school and I’m quite sure a similar forensic audit would find no evidence of racism there either, despite our collective experience as black students.

It’s all very well for Deloitte to speak about “small incidents”, but you see these happen every day. Racism on these campuses is our collective, lived reality; it is a felt, emotional experience, rather than physical and overt.

It results in a chronically tense environment, where you know something is happening but there are hardly any objective parameters to highlight as evidence of its existence. Paradoxically, people grin at you at every turn and call you their friend, yet they don’t even know your name nor would they be caught dead at your mother’s funeral.

Your self-esteem is constantly eroded; there is constant condescension and flattery. These are not quantifiable entities, but are no less detrimental.

Ask most black people who work in such an environment, and they’ll know exactly what I’m talking about.

And no, contrary to popular opinion, racism is not defeated by working hard and showing excellence. This presupposes an inherent logic in its practice.

A forensic audit will most likely present a rosy picture, because racism on campus is not about marking an answer wrong when it’s right, but cutting white students slack and giving them the benefit of the doubt, but not according the same privilege to black students — so that they’re expected to work harder to achieve the same result. — Dr Thapelo Motshudi, Pretoria

Zapiro among world’s best

Zapiro’s cartoon of Jacob Zuma in last week’s Mail & Guardian was one of his best. It is conceptually daring and technically brilliant. It’s a unique image of a cartoonist defending himself against the threats of a bully-boy stripped of moral authority by his own actions.

Under the old dispensation we needed cartoonists to prick the bladder of political authoritarianism. We still need them. Zapiro is the best and brightest we have. More power to your pen, Jonathan, and keep it sharp. — Neville Dubow, Cape Town

Bravo, Zapiro! Keep it up! — Dawn Hull

Zapiro’s cartoon last week was outstanding — in fact, on a par with the world’s best.

Well done, Mr Shapiro, you showed what a buffoon Zuma really is. — Joe Secreve

Zuma should appreciate criticism. As shown by the fact that he had sex with a woman who could have been his own daughter, and his failure to explain his “shower” remark, he is not perfect. — Mcebisi Mkhwanazi

Behind the veil

Naively, I always imagined that the veiling of women is a tool to maintain male dominance in paternalistic societies by forcing women into a submissive role.

Thankfully, my ignorance has been remedied by Khadija Magardie (July 7), who tells me that forcing women to hide behind veils actually protects us men from their tempting “sexual energy”. Another benefit is that it allows women to “contain” their dangerous sexual drive and save it for the bedroom.

Imagine how chaotic the world would be if all women were allowed to show their faces in public! Thanks for enlightening us, Khadija. — Sean Wasserman

‘Lord, make my enemies ridiculous’

I was stunned by quotes attributed to me in two articles by Zukile Majova in last week’s Mail & Guardian. In “Journo censures media in support of Msholozi”, I am quoted as saying the advocate acting for Jacob Zuma in his defamation suits would not charge for his services.

Newspapers bantered last week about how I had no knowledge of the defamation claims. I repeatedly explained that while I knew of and shared Zuma’s view that he had been defamed, I was not involved in planning the lawsuits. Wouldn’t it be strange, then, that I would comment on the lawyers’ payment arrangements — particularly as I have never spoken to the lawyers?

The other story, “Zuma roadshow kicks off”, quotes me protractedly on Zuma’s supposed “comeback” campaign. The quotes are false and conjecture. Majova asked to meet me, saying there were concerns at the M&G about lack of access to Zuma and others close to him. He wanted to change this.

He told me about a plan to screen the documentary The Zuma Media Trial in townships and rural areas. I told him I did not know of this and that there was already a general belief in these very areas that there is a media conspiracy against Zuma.

He asked what is being done to give Zuma a “platform”, and I replied that after the rape trial, Zuma was following the ANC’s programme of activities.

Majova did not take notes, so it blew me away when I saw verbatim quotes from me saying how “Baba is in a position where he can be easily called for a disciplinary [sic] by the ANC for anything he says publicly and is also at the mercy of the party in terms of being given a platform on major events”.

Why would Zuma be susceptible to disciplinary action while addressing public events? If I explained that Zuma was being deployed as part of the ANC’s schedule, why would I talk about creating “platforms”?

The article also said the Friends of Jacob Zuma website had been used to “mobilise for the disruption of government events”, including at Utrecht, where Deputy President Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka was booed. I am associated with editorial control of the website, and disrupting government events is not among its objectives. If this was the case, surely incitement charges would have been brought against those who run it.

I also received mention in the editorial, in the form of spoof directives supposedly written by Zuma when he becomes president, in which he rewards me by making me his spokesperson. My retort is that of Voltaire: “I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous. And God granted it.” — Ranjeni Munusamy

Pessimists

Why do sceptics think South Africa lacks the capacity to host the Fifa World Cup? I’m certain they are the same people who thought that if South Africa became a democratic country, it would run out of control.

People were not pessimistic about our capacity to host the Rugby World Cup. In fact, the current sceptics were eager for the country to do this.

I’m so tired of South Africans who are always thinking the worst of their country. I understand why Safety and Security Minister Charles Nqakula suggested such people emigrate. — Noluthando Gweba, Cape Town

Practise what you preach

The SABC board welcomes the public debate over the media’s selection of commentators and analysts. The debate has broadened public understanding of editorial poli-cies and decision-making processes.

There are a few opportunistic voices in this debate, however, whose views cannot be left unchallenged. These include some ex-SABC employees who are bent on recycling themselves by presenting anecdotal evidence to validate their own opinions, and who try to paint a picture of a world outside the SABC that is akin to an editorial nirvana.

Others have used the opportunity to revive personal attacks on the editor-in-chief or the head of news, or to recycle their own unfounded assessments of the approach that some members of the SABC board take to their work.

The board has a mandated role to play in providing oversight and guidance to the SABC. It has a public obligation to ensure the development and implementation of sound policies. It has a news committee, which provides a forum for discussing and monitoring the development and implementation of policy and for encouraging editorial excellence.

In the same vein, the board has spearheaded an annual “Media in Society” conference, in conjunction with the South African National Editors’ Forum, to debate issues such as news values and editorial policies.

Are these the actions of “an interfering board”, or one that has issues with freedom of expression? Surely it is time to get over this tired notion, which is both inaccurate and jaded — as are the rehashed attacks on the views of individual board members, which are without substance.

Such attacks are unhelpful at a time when there is general recognition of the need for greater professionalism and respect among journalists — both in the SABC and other media. Please begin to practise what you preach.

When the board attempts to fulfil its mandate, it is accused of interference. Should it not fulfil its mandate, it would no doubt be accused of dereliction of duty. A case of damned if we do — and damned if we don’t.

Let us all work together in the interests of a public broadcaster, which builds public knowledge and understanding, rather than resorting to unfounded personal attacks. — Eddie Funde, chairperson, SABC

The Department of Transport has failed the rail sector.

Its officials wake up in their posh, middle-class suburbs and drive to work in their flashy cars. They are bosses themselves so no one reprimands them when they arrive late for work, as often happens to train commuters.

Last year, they called for a Public Transport Day, while using private transport to work.

Some commuters use rail transport to go for interviews and are disqualified because they arrive late. Learners get to school late. Others use it when they go for exams, which they fail for the same reason. Many are fired because they are regularly arrive late for work. The Johannesburg-Roodepoort line is particularly bad.

Despite the torching of carriages, Metrorail management remains recalcitrant and conservative.

The trains are dirty and crowded, with poor commuters packed like sardines in filthy third-class coaches, when there’s nobody in first class.

Commuters are unsafe. Their handbags, cellphones and jewellery are taken from them. Schoolboys practise train surfing, known as “sparapara”. Every day people are electrocuted or have limbs amputated.

The lives of commuters are worthless, it seems. And the Minister of Transport, Jeff Radebe, has nothing to say on the matter. — Vela Ntuli, Gauteng

Overpaid

With reference to “Can this university survive?” (July 7), I have every sympathy with the vice-chancellor of the Walter Sisulu University, and not only because he is my former colleague and student at the University of the Western Cape. I wonder whether university academics are not too highly paid. A lecturer’s post is presently advertised at a starting salary of R257 000. I retired from the UWC rectorship at the end of 1986 at an annual salary of under R25 000. I know that the purchasing power of money has changed, but by so much? — RE van der Ross