In our days as journalism students, there were those who felt strongly that a distinction should be made between ”reporters” and ”journalists”. While some argued that they were one and the same, others suggested a difference: while reporters were content with cataloguing events, journalists went a step further to provide analysis.
Last week’s Mail & Guardian article by Rapule Tabane, who wondered whether it is ”our business as journalists to pronounce on who is best placed to lead the ANC,” (”If it has chosen badly the ruling party will cleanse itself”) triggered memories of those debates.
There is a general understanding that journalists should act as ”watchdogs” and help set the national agenda. Unlike many liberal commentators, I do not subscribe to the view that this watchdog role should be directed at the government alone; rather, it should cover all sectors that have an impact on broader society. The agenda-setting role does not mean that journalists tell people what to do or what to think, but they help focus people’s attention on what to think about.
While journalists know that they do not have the power to decide who wins a party election, they are also aware that they have the power to influence political directions by providing analysis or publicly expressing their opinions. In the event that an individual journalist or newspaper fails in its persuasive abilities, journalists accept the outcome. But accepting the democratic decision of party members does not equate to surrendering the right to criticism.
The ANC’s actions or inactions have serious implications for the rest of South African society. It was in this context that M&G editor Ferial Haffajee, as a journalist, took a critical stance on the ANC’s leadership — a move Tabane describes as ”take(ing) it too far”. Tabane’s assertion that the ”millions of South Africans who voted for the ANC during the last national poll will again have an opportunity to signal whether they approve of the party’s leadership during national and provincial elections next April” is not enough!
People vote once every five years. What happens in between? Who keeps them informed so that they can make educated decisions? Party spokespersons?
Here lies our role as journalists: to raise critical issues that party loyalists may be uncomfortable with or even disallowed to talk about. The beauty of journalism is that it provides space for public dissent even ”within the family”. So Tabane can write an opinion piece in which he openly disagrees with his editor. In political parties, party discipline dictates that such disagreements must be discussed ”within party structures”. Refusal to conform to the party line has serious consequences, especially for those who lack demagogic powers to sway the masses. The demagogues are only allowed to make their noises so as not to allow a split. Party discipline in such cases is put on ice. Journalists question these inconsistencies.
Simphiwe Sesanti, a journalism lecturer at Stellenbosch University, writes in his personal capacity