The Mail & Guardian tried to put some tough questions to Forum of Black Journalists (FBJ) chairperson Abbey Makoe.
Why has it been necessary to relaunch the FBJ? Why did it fail the first time around?
Black journalists feel that although change in the media is notable, there is nonetheless still more that can be done to improve the lot of formerly disadvantaged journalists. It failed, I believe, due to poor dedication to the cause by the leadership and membership alike. The relaunch might propel us to revisit such factors in order to avoid a repeat.
The South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) has suggested the FBJ’s racially exclusive character may violate the Constitution, which upholds horizontal rights to racial equality and dignity among citizens. Your response?
The [SAHRC] has spoken in recognition of the right of the FBJ to exist in the way it does. It noted with concern, however, the possible impact of racial exclusion on our non-racial society.
What will your submission to the HRC hearings next week say?
That it is our considered opinion that the Constitution allows us the freedom of assembly and association.
If racial dignity is your aim, were the white journalists barred from Friday’s meeting treated with racial dignity?
Issues of individual and group development of the formerly disadvantaged journalists, and not matters of race, are our priority.
In a hostile political atmosphere and with profits coming before profession, is it not better to strive for a united forum of journalists that does not shy away from the very real race issues but also forges unity and nonÂracialism? This is what Sanef has done with some success.
I do not believe that we live in a hostile political atmosphere. A united forum of journalists is ideal in an atmosphere of a complete implementation of remedial measures aimed at redressing the past imbalances in the Fourth Estate.
Other black professional organisations, such as the Black Lawyers’ Association and Absip, have no formal racial bars at public events. What’s different about journalists?
We fashion ourselves on our actual experience in the media industry and mimic no one on the basis of the word ”black”.
The FBJ may entrench racial access to politicians given that it kicked off with a blacksÂonly, offÂthe-record briefing with Jacob Zuma. Should race determine access to information?
Race should definitely not be a determinant factor in terms of access to politicians, although I know of no black reporter who had access to our dethroned white rulers a mere 13 years ago. In a fledgling democracy such as ours, it is disingenuous of the critics of the FBJ to suggest that everything is now hunkyÂdory.
The three key people behind the relaunch of the FBJ are not journalists. Shouldn’t a journalists’ forum be led by journalists? The three are Nomvula Khalo (fullÂtime writer), Sandile Memela (government spokesperson) and Duma Ndlovu (a television producer).
I am unaware of the three nonÂjournalists referred to. FBJ is led by journalists. I am one of them.
Memela believes some black journalists are too critical of the ANC government. There is a perception that the FBJ will preach and practise a model of developmental journalism, now the leitmotif of the SABC. This model considers it unÂAfrican to be disrespectful to figures of authority and to opt for national interest to trump the public interest in matters of public debate. What is your view?
The FBJ is certainly not a body of imbongis (praise singers) who will close their eyes to the misdemeanours of government officials because they are black. As journalists we hold very dearly the principle of public interest but also take very seriously concerns of national interest of our country.
Would the FBJ have supported or condemned the Sunday Times exposé of the allegations of kleptomania and alcoholism of the Health Minister, Manto Tshabalala-Msimang?
The FBJ will support the publication of substantiated allegations against anyone, regardless of the position they hold in society.
What membership figures are you striving for?
Nomvula Khalo: We are going to go on membership drives in Cape Town, Durban and Gauteng.
How will the organisation operate?
We are volunteers and we are just reviving it. We have not raised funds yet but for now we will be driving membership.
Give us a few examples, without names, of the issues journalists have raised as they embraced the relaunch. What are the key issues facing black journalists in newsrooms?
Training, equality in the newsroom and enhancing their careers.
What does this say about the fact that most newsrooms are blackÂrun, with significant numbers of black journalists in senior editorial leadership positions?
No response.
THE EDITORS SPEAK
The M&G‘s Adriaan Basson asked the following editors:
1. what they think of the revival of the FBJ; and
2. their reaction to the FBJ excluding white journalists from attending an off-the-record briefing with Zuma.
Phylicia Oppelt, editor: Daily Dispatch
1. I don’t think there is a need. What are the pressing issues for black journalists in this country when most news organisations are being led by black editors or managers? By giving attention to the forum, it gives it some life, credence and justification for existing.
2. I think it is unnecessarily divisive and reactionary. Abbey Makoe’s comment that ”they” would respect the right of white journalists to gather along the same lines is trite and mischievous because he knows there would be outrage if they did so. I would like to see an organisation of South African journalists where issues of professionalism, skills and common problems are explored and debated.
Mathatha Tsedu, editor-in-chief: City Press
1. As an editor who belongs to the South African National Editors’ Forum (Sanef), an organisation we formed because we saw a need for it, I am in no position to condemn those who in their own right and view see a need for an organisation of the nature of the FBJ.
2. The steering committee of the FBJ issued invitations to an invitation-only function. Those not invited, in terms of Western culture, had no right to go as, in terms of this white culture, if you are not invited you do not pitch. But they did not only pitch up, they arrived ready to report on a function that was not for reporting and, when they were told they could not come in, they raised a stink.
This is sheer arrogance to me. Black journalists have a right to decide for themselves that they want to talk among themselves, while being addressed by whoever they choose to invite.
I hope the FBJ will invite Credo Mutwa next time and we will await the stampede by white journalists to go in and listen to an off-the-record briefing on African culture. Journalists who have tried and failed to corner Jacob Zuma for comments cannot blame the FBJ for refusing to be used to accomplish this.
Tim du Plessis, editor: Rapport
1. I see no objective need for such an organisation. What special issues can black journalists still have after 15 years of newsroom transformation? The most influential editors today are black. The leadership of Sanef is predominantly black and has been for more than a decade. The bulk of our corps of young journalists is black. All the big media companies have transformation forums in place and vigorously adhere to employment-equity rules. If black journalists have issues in spite of all of this, they should take it up with their individual companies.
White journalists, incidentally, also claim to have issues after 15 years of newsroom transformation. Yet they would be really silly if they formed a thing called the Forum for White Journalists.
Storm clouds are gathering on the South African media horizon. Black and white journalists need to stand together like never before if we really want to protect what is dear and important to us.
2. The whole episode was described as ”pathetic” in a Rapport editorial. I listened to and read Abbey Makoe’s explanations and justifications. The more I learned, the more confused I became. It was rather extraordinary that Abbey used the existence of the ultra-right-wing Transvaalse Landbou-Unie [Transvaal Agricultural Union] to justify the revival and actions of the FBJ. Of all the examples in the world —
Debra Patta, editor-in-chief: e.tv
1. In theory I don’t have a problem if black journalists want a forum, but we should ask the question: where are we going in this country? When the FBJ was operating previously, it was under a different set of circumstances. It was apartheid and black journalists wanted to reclaim the newsrooms.
2. There is no place for this in South Africa. We’ve got an entire history of fighting racism and apartheid. This is appalling.
Henry Jeffreys, editor: Die Burger
1. I have no problem with journalists organising themselves as they see fit as the Constitution guarantees freedom of association.
2. I think it is unfortunate that one group of journalists took a decision that effectively excludes another group of journalists from attending. As far as I know, this was not a members-only meeting of the FBJ, but that it was also open to black journalists who were not necessarily members of the organisation.
As things stand, we still don’t know what the issues raised with Jacob Zuma were about for it to be shrouded in such secrecy.
Yusuf Abramjee, Primedia group head: news and talk programming
1. I said at the opening of the [FBJ] meeting I don’t have a problem per se with the existence of an FBJ, because there might be issues that affect so-called ”black journalists”. However, we should have a long discussion and debate about whether the body should exclusively be limited for certain parts of the population.
2. I said at the start [of the FBJ meeting] that whites should not be excluded on the grounds of freedom of association. The Constitution should not be used selectively. The Constitution also doesn’t allow for any form of racial discrimination.