/ 30 May 2007

Everything about Raymond

Press Freedom: Reporters Without Borders’ annual report

Do you think it is fair to equate press freedom in South Africa to that of the United States (which is the case according to the Reporters Without Borders’ annual report on press freedom for 2007)?

Yes, it is not only fair but important that press freedom be equated to the standards applying to international democratic governments – and by democratic I mean those that are real democracies and not those that use the term to cover authoritarian conduct. Press freedom is a universal standard and standards that apply in Scandinavia (generally rated among the highest in the world) and other Western democracies are the standards that should be applied universally. If the question means is the standard in South Africa on the same level as that in the United States, constitutionally our standard is as high, if not higher; the standard of our practice of press freedom is variable as it is in the United States with our limited best practice equating with theirs.

The report rated South Africa as satisfactory. How do you view the state of press freedom in South Africa and how can it be improved?

Well, there are two aspects to this question: whether press freedom is tolerated by the government and whether press freedom is exercised by the press? The answer to the first is that toleration is rapidly eroding:

  • There are old laws on our statute book that the media has been asking the government for more than a decade to review and scrap or amend; and
  • There are new laws which impinge on press freedom such as:

    • Anti-terrorism legislation which holds serious dangers for journalists;
    • Communications monitoring legislation which is being racheted up further to allow more opportunities for snooping on telephone and cellphone calls;
    • The proposed Films and Publications Amendment Bill which introduces pre-publication censorship;
    • The anti “hate-speech” legislation contained in the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act;
    • Illegal exclusion of journalists from certain court cases and the censoring by bodyguards of photographs of the president and deputy president; and
    • The escalation of hostile commentary on media practice by politicians and high-placed state officials.

    The answer to the second question is that the media does exercise media freedom, sometimes with great initiative being shown by investigative journalists but there are elements of media freedom that are neglected. By that I mean the media is not penetrating the barriers that are being raised to coverage such as in the major city councils or exploring specialist areas of coverage.

    Why do you think Reporters Without Borders rated the state of press freedom in Namibia more favourable than the situation in South Africa?

    I am not aware that Reporters without Borders did this. There is no comparison of the two countries in the 2007 report except for a passing reference to Namibia having a “satisfactory” level of Press freedom. In any event, that rating of Namibia is flawed. The Namibian government exercises tight control and censorship over the state broadcaster and it has banned state advertisements from The Namibian, the most popular paper in the country, and also prohibited state officials from reading it, moves intended to damage the paper and thus restrict its operations – fortunately, unsuccessfully.

    More on Press Freedom

    In your opinion, which African countries have the worst press freedom status and why?

    The worst are Ethiopia and Eritrea with several journalists in jail for criticising the government, but they are closely followed by The Gambia, Chad, and Zimbabwe. And those are followed by a number of African countries that stamp on journalists and press freedom.

    Last year, I monitored government action against journalists in Africa over the three months from March to June and came up with 18 instances of repression and/or assault or detention affecting some 66 journalists in 14 countries. And don’t forget, the scourge of African journalism are the prevalent “insult laws” and criminal defamation which give special protection to heads of state and frequently other high officials from so-called insult, contempt or disrespect of them or a country’s institutions.

    They are frequently used against journalists for “false reporting”. They exist in 48 of Africa’s 53 countries (South Africa does not have them).

    What is your view on the apparent conflict of interest between Press Freedom versus the Right to Privacy, and what is the South African National Editors Forum’s view on this?

    There will always be conflict between these two concepts because the media believes that people in public life have very little right to privacy. Many times what such people do in private has relevance to, or impacts on, their public status and therefore is the subject of public interest and thus the attention of reporters. Journalists believe that the public have a right to know what public figures do in private in those circumstances. Sanef has the same view.

    In general

    Is trial by media as prolific as we are made to believe?

    On occasion this may occur when the media takes up a strong position against a person who may be a political or community leader in regard to conduct, policy position or involvement in some deal regarded as shady. But generally the media is reflecting what the public perception is of that person in the light of events – and, the media is generally more circumspect and thus does not reflect the extremes of public views. Then, people confuse trial by media with the media reporting on what happens in court or at public hearings or other forums and because it gives publicity to these situations, people regard not the fact that the media is conveying information but that it is conducting a trial. I should add that the emphasis (big headlines and space) that the media gives to these stories, tend to be regarded as proof of the media conducting a trial whereas they are intended to reflect the importance of a story.

    What advice would you have for editors have today?

    In view of staff cuts, to pressure their publishers to allow them greater resource to broaden their coverage and include more specialist beats. Maintain constant vigilance over inroads on press freedom.

    Which publications are your favourite read?

    I don’t have a favourite because I read selectively most of the Johannesburg dailies and like pieces in all of them.

    Quality journalism? All of them show flashes of it, the tabloids less so though they certainly have their place.

    What would you like to change in the South African media landscape?

    One always wants to see improvement in quality journalism, more comprehensive coverage, more about Africa (what has happened to the old Africa news services of the Argus Company – now Independent Newspapers – and SA Associated Newspapers – now Johncom?), more in depth labour news and what is really happening in our municipalities?

    On a more personal note

    You are known not to hesitate to write protest letters to presidents. Do you think this makes a difference? Who is next on your list and why?

    I’m never sure what they achieve but it is important that the protest be lodged so that the president knows that he is being watched and his conduct criticised. When I visited Cameroon some years back to plead for a pardon for Le Messager Editor Pius Njawe (jailed under an “insult law”) and asked the Foreign Minister to convey the plea to President Paul Biya, Njawe was released six months later after serving half his term. I think the special plea nay have had something to do with that. The International Press Institute has evidence of letters to a president from some of its members resulting in the freeing of a journalist who was serving a long sentence. Next president? So many to choose from. When some awful action is taken against a journalist.

    What are the highlights and lowlights of your career?

    Highlights – Editorship of the Rand Daily Mail in challenging times with a wonderfully dedicated staff.

    Lowlights? I suppose being fired as editor over policy, or perhaps spending six months of a London winter trying to find a job in British journalism.

    Do you have any regrets, and if so, what are they?

    Not many, though one always has the feeling that whatever one did could have been done better, like achieving more at the Mail.

    What makes you love the media industry so much?

    I can’t imagine a life in any other sphere of activity that is as exciting, that presents so many experiences ranging over the spectrum of human activity and opportunities to meet so many people from so many walks of life from the exalted to the lowest. But I suppose what it boils down to is that the media is at the heart of the essential communications oxygen of life and to be wrapped up in it is always exhilarating.

    If there was one thing you would ban – be it a gadget or a practice in the industry, what would it be?

    The activities of the reporter who once told me (in London) that his story in his paper that day would never be equalled – because he had made it up!

    What are you currently reading? What else do you do on your spare time?

    John Allen’s book on Archbishop Desmond Tutu – “Rabble Rouser for Peace”. There’s not much spare time but a trip to the bush is always worthwhile.

    And lastly, what can we expect from Raymond Louw this year?

    The remaining editions of Volume 25 of my current affairs weekly newsletter Southern Africa Report – and continuing vigilance over, and protest at, invasions of media freedom.