/ 22 July 2016

Investigative journalism increasingly ditched in favour of frantic click-baiting

A vigilant media helps to expose wrongdoing
A vigilant media helps to expose wrongdoing

Journalism is one of the most pretentious industries out there. For one thing, I can’t think of another labour sector — other than entertainment — that has so many awards ceremonies. Journalists are constantly giving each other prizes and patting themselves on the back for being the cornerstones of democracy.

Don’t get me wrong: it’s a no-brainer that quality journalism does help to hold the powerful to account. This very newspaper’s proud roots prove as much. More recently, without the likes of the work undertaken by the late Mandy Rossouw, the South African public might not have found out about the “scope creep” at Nkandla.

But there is also a tendency among many journalists, myself included, to be hopped up on the importance of their roles. That’s why the media usually report so extensively on developments in the media. Witness the scenes a few years ago when the secrecy Bill was on the cards, and the media went bananas. For good reason: it obviously would have been less than ideal to have government wrongdoing shielded from public view, or for journalists to be sent to jail for doing their jobs.

At the same time, though, I couldn’t help but feel that the Protection of State Information Bill received a disproportionate amount of attention from the media simply because it affected the media. The Traditional Courts Bill didn’t attract the same degree of media outrage, and that legislation would turn millions of rural citizens into feudal subjects.

The saga of SABC journalists dismissed for taking a stance against Hlaudi Motsoeneng’s dodgy editorial decisions continues to find a prominent place in the headlines and bulletins of other media houses. This is probably attributable to two factors. The first is that parts of the media are not immune to a powerful sense of Schadenfreude, which makes them seize with glee on misfortune afflicting competitors.

The second is a more legitimate motivation for giving the matter coverage: that it reflects a worrying trend of government: seeking to crack down on dissent and criticism. The decision not to report on protests is most chilling because it comes at a time when the state budget for public-order policing has been steadily and quietly increasing. We deserve to know what that scary new equipment is being used for.

From this perspective, it’s understandable that the SABC’s privately owned competitors are going big on this story. We should all be worried.

But there’s something missing from this picture. The biggest threat to media freedom in South Africa is not Motsoeneng, or ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe, or anyone in government, for that matter.

The biggest threat to media freedom in South Africa is money — or, rather, its lack.

There are few countries in which state media are regarded as a bastion of objectivity and truth. Perhaps the closest one comes to that would be Britain’s BBC, but that is by no means an unsullied institution either. In fact, it’s constantly under fire from both sides of the political spectrum.

When I interviewed the head of the “remain” campaign a few weeks ago, he complained bitterly about the BBC’s pre-Brexit coverage, suggesting the broadcaster should shoulder its share of responsibility for the outcome of the vote because of the “false sense of balance” it created between the arguments for Britain to stay in the European Union and to leave.

The SABC spent the entire duration of apartheid pumping out propaganda, so what is happening now is really just a regression. That doesn’t lessen the bravery of the journalists taking a stand against this decline. Frankly, I don’t know whether I would have the guts to do it. That’s because the situation in South African media outside the SABC is also deeply concerning. A friend recently described it as a “bloodbath”.

Providing in-depth reporting on the issues that matter requires money. That, in turn, requires readers, viewers and listeners — and advertisers — willing to pay for quality content. In an era in which so much is available for free online, though, most of us have become complacent about being able to consume whatever we want without forking out for it. It’s a problem being experienced worldwide, but South African media are feeling it hard.

What’s happening at the SABC is disturbing. But more worrying, to me, is the whittling down of newsrooms outside of state media: the independent outlets we should be able to rely on to give us the unvarnished truth without having to be government lapdogs.

It’s an era in which costly investigative journalism is increasingly being ditched in favour of frantic clickbaiting to pursue elusive digital revenue. And the public, unfortunately, is playing along. Today, the “most read” article on South Africa’s biggest news website is the following: “TV shocker as four more stars leave 7de Laan!”

Lament what’s happening at the SABC, by all means. But as privately owned media outlets scale back on journalism, let’s recognise that we may all be contributing to a less free media outside it.