/ 24 April 2007

Press freedom: Some more equal than others?

I am flabbergasted by the numbers of freedom of speech disciples who believe that Ronald Suresh Roberts, author and articulate pain in the butt, should not be allowed in print.

Numerous liberals of varied hue have told me, with growing irritation, that I’m selling out the side by letting him onto our pages. I disagree.

Commitment to principles like freedom of expression will always be tested by your tolerance for views that run counter to your own.

It¹s easy to print opinions with which you agree; more interesting to run those you don¹t.

Roberts is, as Judge Leslie Weinkove found in a recent defamation judgement for the Sunday Times, indeed unlikable and argumentative. He keeps odd friends like the Aids denialist Anthony Brink and he is also good at losing friends. Witness the tatters that his relationship with author Nadine Gordimer is now in.

But he is also bright as a button, well read and contrarian. As editor of the Mail&Guardian, I’ve always enjoyed giving him space on our pages. His pieces are inevitably crafted to spec, shot through with an argumentative, if slightly defensive turn of phrase. They piss people off which the best opinions do. We have numerous responses which start good debates.

On our pages, he’s piqued the ire of senior staff like deputy editor, Drew Forrest, who relishes releasing the safety catch on his keyboard to let go at Roberts. So does columnist John Matshikiza now into the third year of battle against the Trinidadian carpet-bagger.

Roberts can go too far. He is thin-skinned and litigious. I’ve had legal demands from him more times than is savoury and he is dogged. He is the only litigant who has made our gutsy lawyer Doris Tsepe pale. He did the same with the Sunday Times silk Wim Trengove until he got his come-uppance in a judgement that is excellent for ratcheting up judicial tolerance levels for the robust critique of public figures.

After the judgement, our colleague Fikile-Ntsikilelo Moya interviewed Roberts. In a wide-ranging, mouthy interview he let rip, calling the media the hand-maidens of mining capital, telling us his biography of President Mbeki would let us into the soul of the man more than any other and informing readers that he will soon unleash a journal called Molotov onto the newsstands. Molotov? How very Roberts.

For this interview, my liberal friends threw up their hands: “How can you?” It’s an odd quirk coming from people at the forefront of the ranks of advocates of free expression. Freedom of expression’s fine, they seem to say, as long as we can determine who gets it and who doesn’t. Earlier on in this debate, it seemed to be because of his literary wrestle with Nadine Gordimer. For the record, I do believe that he broke trust with her, but this is not reason enough to censor his views or refuse him right to reply. We must get as good as we give.

At a function at Xarra Books in Newtown in February, Roberts spoke about his Gordimer biography, about his forthcoming Mbeki tome and generally about the media. His audience was largely young and black and were quite in awe of him. Because of the perceived attacks on him, Roberts has become the hero, in much the same ways that Jacob Zuma and Tony Yengeni have become.

This is because of the South African penchant for making heroes of perceived under-dogs but also because of something we in the media need to be aware of: when we are perceived to pack upon someone, that person becomes a public hero.

It’s worth thinking about. One way of undercutting the tendency is to allow opinions of all stripes onto our pages. It is not endorsement but living by our principles of fairness and balance and ensuring that we do not make heroes of people who are not.

Ferial Haffajee is the editor of the weekly Mail & Guardian and the chairperson of the South African National Editors Forum.