South Africa: Choices for SA’s media in new era of openness [opinion]

My previous column was meant to be the last. But my sense of gratitude to Business Day got the better of me. I have been afforded the privilege of rebelling against mainstream thinking in the media. I was enriched by intelligent responses. Yes, sometimes I had to contend with insults. By allowing diversity of opinion, Business Day has displayed its commitment to democratic engagement.

The effect on society has been subtle. It is perhaps most evident within the ruling party. Not long ago the ruling party risked being reduced to a one-opinion party — an opinion that coincided with the leader’s. Fear appeared to be the main determinant of our politics. Reflecting on this self-imposed paralysis, I wrote, “What silenced the so-called tried and tested cadres? How do we explain that those who defied torture, imprisonment and the threat of death itself have been reduced to mere minions?”

 

I suggested among other things, that “the scramble for political office, with beady eyes on material benefits, has replaced political idealism…. Since merit is the least consideration, many are not prepared to risk the loss of newly acquired status by raising their voice against corruption, incompetence and abuse of office. Instead they built an arsenal of excuses to explain away their political and moral bankruptcy.”

 

To its credit, the media remained the bastion of intellectual engagement. University academics, those entrusted with knowledge production and the identification and resolution of societal challenges, displayed dizzying intellectual cowardice. Except for a handful of academics, many went underground rather than risk facing reprisals for speaking on HIV/AIDS, Zimbabwe, and suppression of dissent. Criticism was equated with being unpatriotic.

 

For some of us, criticism is a mark of commitment and conviction. I saw no contradiction in agreeing to serve in various ministerial task and advisory teams. Critical posture starts with commitment, and is not always informed by a view that regards government as an enemy. In mature democracies, being called to serve in government is considered an honour. Here it is equated to betrayal. For his part, US President Barack Obama appointed Steven Chu, Nobel laureate in physics, to be his secretary of energy.

 

We have made some progress. We are less defensive about our challenges. We are less paranoid. There is more tolerance for opposition parties and their role in entrenching democracy is gradually being appreciated.

 

Arguably, Polokwane ushered a new environment — a possibility of dialogue within and among political parties. Unfortunately, it did not take long before we resorted to comfortable zones of name-calling. The advent of the Congress of the People also introduced a new political activism in the media. All pretences of neutrality disappeared as some radio and television stations sought to promote certain parties.

 

Reading some of the commentary before the elections, an outsider would have been forgiven for thinking the ruling party would be lucky to scrape 10% of the vote. The fact that some media could be so far off the mark reflects the extent to which they have become disconnected with communities on whose behalf they claim to exist. This is an instance where the media abdicated its responsibility of fairness.

 

Indeed, the course of democracy demands that from time to time every statement must be dissected, scrutinised and interpreted in ways beyond one’s control. But s uch a scenario, unless balanced, can lead to a situation where politicians begin to serve the media instead of their own constituencies.

 

Reflecting on this in The Audacity of Hope , Obama wrote, “How long does it take for the politician to internalise all this; how long before the committee of scribes and editors and censors took residence in your head; how long before even the ‘candid’ moments become scripted, so that you choked up and expressed outrage only on cue. How long before you started sounding like politicians?”

 

Our media has served us well. But it too requires scrutiny if it is to serve the democratic project. That’s it folks, my last word.

 

n Seepe is a higher education and strategy consultant.

 

- 27 January,2010 by Sipho Seepe

……………..

Source: www.businessday.co.za/articles/Content.aspx  (accessed on 28.01.10)