Government communications has serious concerns about the story, “Govt’s plan to support New Age” (Mail & Guardian, October 29)
In terms of presentation alone, the M&G used two headlines — one on page one and the other on page four — to state as fact the suggestion made by anonymous sources that the government would be “supporting” The New Age and the SABC with a shift in adspend.
Our complaint is that the headlines do not in any way indicate that this is a claim made by your sources or that government has disputed this claim.
We are concerned that the M&G has deemed it fair to publicise an allegation of this seriousness on the basis of an unsubstantiated, anonymous claim.
We say unsubstantiated, because we challenge the source or sources concerned, as well as the M&G itself, to produce evidence of this, which we dismiss outright as a fiction.
We are also concerned that very detailed information provided by the Government Communication and Information System (GCIS) in answer to the M&G, which gave us a day’s notice to respond, has been distorted in support of the thesis provided by your sources.
Distorted response
We believe that any reasonable reader of the information provided would conclude that our response was distorted.
Furthermore, issues never queried with the GCIS are presented as facts, such as that the GCIS owes money to its previous contractor on media buying, which, for the record, it does not.
We reject the argument that the GCIS is in the business of “supporting” so-called patriotic media (your formulation) and “breaking the camel’s back” in other instances.
We are tasked with providing public information to all South Africans and we constantly review our options in the media marketplace to ensure that information reaches all South Africans in their media of choice.
The GCIS is accountable to the presidency and Parliament and is humbled by the portfolio committee on communications’ consistent evaluation of the GCIS as a professional, non-partisan institution.
It takes pride in its clean record of good and transparent governance, confirmed year after year by the auditor general and the Public Service Commission.
GCIS records
As such, any journalist with a bona fide intention could have accessed GCIS records, such as minutes of meetings, to confirm the facts.
The government’s communication strategy is known to the Cabinet and Parliament, and therefore to citizens at large.
Naturally, part of this strategy deals with media buying and it is in this area that we are reassessing our practice with a view to making the best possible media selection and ensuring that we extract value for the money entrusted to us by the treasury and therefore the taxpayer.
Unlike what M&G readers “learned”, there is no overt or covert plan for the GCIS to act as a player in the media market. Our role is to inform South Africans and to be guided by the choices people make as they consume media.
As we do this work, we will, as in any organisation, evaluate the professional and financial resources required for success.
The GCIS has not taken a decision that will result in an unfair benefit or disadvantage to any particular media institution. To suggest that the GCIS will direct 90% of the government’s adspend to the public broadcaster (60%) and The New Age (30%) is ludicrous.
Reaching the audience
Anybody who knows anything about media planning and buying can actually see this allegation for what it is — mischief or, at the very worst, uninformed journalism.
There is no way two media outlets can deliver 90% of the audiences that the government seeks to reach.
The GCIS will continue to assess whether its media mix has the widest reach, with the highest impact for government’s target markets.
Your newspaper and the public would expect nothing less from us and we will not be derailed from this responsibility as a result of misinformation to the media.
Themba Maseko is chief executive officer of the GCIS