The Editor
Mail & Guardian
Dear Madam
I live in hope that some day journalists and bearers of political office will all understand the value of shared responsibility and mutual professionalism. Too frequently, conduct on the part of some dents these hopes. The article by your reporter, Ms Vicki Robinson, in your edition of August 11 to 17 demonstrates such negative conduct.
Ms Robinson interviewed me for the article, which appeared under the rubric ”We must preserve the ANC’s soul”. Regrettably, the opening sentence, which reads ”There were fears within the African National Congress that big business could take over the ANC, Finance Minister Trevor Manuel told the Mail & Guardian this week,” does not arise from any discussion between Ms Robinson and I.
I meticulously explained that a task team was set up to deal with a wider set of ethical concerns and at no stage alluded to Ms Robinson’s conclusion. There are no such fears within the ANC and I do not believe that the organisation faces any such threat. Indeed, if Ms Robinson had asked me, I would have advised her accordingly.
The fact that these views are now attributed to me smacks of the lowest form of tabloid journalism. Moreover, that she could stoop so low in an article that deals with the topic of ethics defies belief.
When the incorrectness of the article was raised both with her and yourself, I was offered a right of reply. The problem with this is that the onus is shifted on to me to correct an article that was intended to mislead.
I ask you, once again, Madam Editor, to restore our faith in the professionalism of your team. The onus for that rests squarely in your newsroom.
Yours sincerely
Trevor A Manuel, MP
Minister of Finance
Franz Krüger: THE OMBUD
If I install a burglar alarm in my house, can my friends and neighbours assume that I am concerned about the possibility of a break-in?
It seems a reasonable assumption. The only possible reason for calling in the alarm people is that I want to prevent burglary, which in turn suggests I’m worried about it.
The example neatly illustrates the core of the strongly worded complaint (above) by Minister of Finance Trevor Manuel. He told the Mail & Guardian last week that the African National Congress was developing a code of conduct to regulate the relationship between the party and business ”to prevent any member of the ANC owning the party”. But he was greatly angered when the newspaper introduced the report with the claim, attributed to him, that ”there were fears” in the ANC ”that big business could take over the ANC”.
The report and the complaint need to be seen against the background of the real debate within and beyond the ANC about the way in which some people have turned their party connection into hard cash. Opposite the Manuel report, the M&G last week continued its focus on the issue by reporting on the ”oligarchy of politicians turned business people”.
Would the ANC be developing a code on these matters if there was no concern about them? Not likely. But Manuel doesn’t want to be seen as saying so — as minister of finance, he has learnt to weigh his words carefully.
Journalists have to interpret politicians’ statements, and the opening sentence that upset Manuel tried to do exactly that, drawing a conclusion that seems fairly obvious.
If the paper had presented that conclusion as its own, Manuel would have had no cause for complaint. But it should not have been attributed to him. The step may have been a small one, but he did not want to take it. And that is his right.
*****
Earlier this month, the paper reported that several ”Justice Bills have been shelved” (August 4). The report was based on a statement to that effect by President Thabo Mbeki after a Cabinet lekgotla. Mbeki said the Bills were being held for further consultation — thereby confirming earlier M&G reports, and contradicting furious denials at the time from the Justice Ministry, which were given prominent treatment in other newspapers.
It’s always nice to be proved right.
Editor Ferial Haffajee raised the issue with me. She is peeved by the way other papers have dealt with some of the paper’s exclusives. The pattern is that the M&G breaks a notable story, one the competition feels the need to pick up.
But it’s often impossible to match the research that has gone into, for instance, the disclosures about some of the friends of police National Commissioner Jackie Selebi. The easy option is to obtain the inevitable denial — not that it was missing from the M&G story — and give it splash treatment.
Intentionally or not, it has the effect of rubbishing the M&G’s stories.
What other newspapers do is not part of my brief. If they choose to risk being proved so badly wrong, that’s their business.
The Mail&Guardian’s ombud provides an independent view of the paper’s journalism. If you have any complaints you would like addressed, you can contact Franz Krüger at [email protected]. You can also phone the paper on (011) 250 7300 and leave a message