If ever a year deserved the clichéd description of being one of highs and lows, it was the media’s 2010.
From the patriotic excitement, even euphoria, of the Fifa World Cup, journalists plunged straight into what has been described as the biggest fight for press freedom in the new South Africa.
Almost as the final whistle blew and newspapers reluctantly removed the Bafana colours from their mastheads, the ruling party served up two major challenges. Neither the proposal for a Media Appeals Tribunal (MAT) nor the Protection of Information (POI) Bill was new, but they were given fresh impetus just as the Fifa caravan left for home.
The Bill reached the stage of a hearing in the parliamentary portfolio committee in July, while ANC and alliance leaders launched a barrage of criticism at the media and called for a tribunal to bring it into line.
Since then, the two measures have been exhaustively debated, and we reach the end of the year with some softening of position on both fronts. Aspects of the Bill are being rethought, although some voices in the ANC have criticised the tribunal idea.
The signals remain contradictory, though. Senior leaders, such as deputy president Kgalema Motlanthe, have said the proposal for a tribunal is being held pending reform to the system of self-regulation currently being considered by the media itself. But the party’s official position, as reiterated in a recent letter to the Press Council, remains that Parliament should investigate a tribunal.
While a moderation of tone is very welcome, it is clear that some underlying issues have not disappeared.
The two measures are merely the most visible expressions of a growing anger towards the media felt by many in the ruling party. There have been other indicators, ranging from the arrest of Sunday Times journalist Mzilikazi wa Afrika to the reluctance of the defence ministry to release previously uncontroversial information.
Where does this depth of hostility come from? Some commentators have blamed it on the ANC’s basically undemocratic leanings. This may be rhetorically satisfying, but it is facile and explains little.
Rather, we need to understand it as coming from a ruling party that regards itself as the legitimate and only embodiment of the nation’s aspirations to liberation, progress and transformation.
At the same time, it is a party that is finding many of South Africa’s problems intractable. We should recognise that many in the party are genuinely frustrated by the difficulties of transformation.
Take these two factors together and it is clear that the sometimes gleeful exposure of problems and missteps will rankle. The ANC finds it easy — and convenient — to read criticism as unpatriotic. Sometimes party activists say explicitly that the media should fall in line with the views of the majority, as expressed in its consistently strong electoral performance.
And then there are internal differences, for which the supposed evils of the media provide a convenient piece of common ground. Various factions may fight bitterly on all kinds of issues, but on this one everyone can agree.
These are some of the markers of the political terrain, in which bitter anger towards the media has grown.
It’s as well to realise that it won’t disappear in a hurry. A softening of position on the immediate measures under discussion should not be understood as a Damascene conversion.
As long as the fundamental political factors remain unchanged, that anger will continue to simmer and is likely to surface again at some point, even if it takes a different form.
Critics, of course, blame the media itself for the conflict. A flagrant disregard for individual reputation and privacy has drawn public anger, the ANC would have us believe.
Defence Minister Lindiwe Sisulu, for instance, told the Mail & Guardian last week that the tragic suicide of Retlabusa Mokonyane, the son of Gauteng premier Nomvula Mokonyane, was directly owing to media persecution.
The debate has raised sharp questions about quality in journalism, and it is one we cannot simply dismiss even if we understand the political context.
We need to ask ourselves how good our reporting really is, and be prepared to admit where mistakes have been made. Whether there is pressure to do so or not, we should always be ready to subject our practices and institutions to scrutiny.
Unfortunately, the political backdrop of the discussion has made it almost impossible to talk rationally about problems in the media. Many have simply defaulted to an absolutely defensive mode.
At least in respect of the need for a greater diversity of voices, we should be able to agree with our critics. We will all be better off if the New Age, finally launched this week, succeeds, and if community media become stronger.
We would also be better off if the SABC, that long-running soap opera of this and other years, would stop being the elephant not in the room.
It needs to begin taking its rightful position at the core of the country’s media, acting as a bridge between various communities in the way that other media struggle to do; reporting sharply; presenting innovative programming.
As the country shuts down for the festive season, here’s my prediction: that the three themes of political anger, journalistic quality and media diversity will shape the debate around the media in 2011.
The Mail & Guardian‘s ombud provides an independent view of the paper’s journalism. If you have any complaints, you can contact me at [email protected]. You can also phone the paper on 011 250 7300 and leave a message. Full disclosure: I am also a member of the SA Press Appeals Panel.