The People’s Media Consortium, Media Review Network have praised big media houses eNCA, the SABC, Primedia, News24 and others when they have spoken about corruption and the necessity for clean governance and accountable democracy.  

They are, however, surprised that these groups have now chosen not to touch on the publicly reported cases on the Sunday Times, The Citizen, and Biznews violations of media standards and, in the case of The Times and the Citizen, violations of the Press Code. (Those that spoke of one form of corruption too, have failed to connect the dots about this scourge in our society.)

BizNews is not a member of the Press Council of South Africa, and thus not subject to the press code and procedure but these questions are valid for all knowledge producers – the press in particular. Why are they silent? Are they compromised too?

Their silence is enough reason why an investigation into media ethics must be held as a matter of urgency – because maybe many journalists have something to hide?

The code is clear when it insists that journalists remain independent and free from non professional considerations, avoiding conflicts of interests (clause 1.37) and not receiving a bribe or deriving any benefit which may influence their coverage (clause 1.38). Finally, clause 2.39 demands that the media must indicate clearly when an outside organisation has contributed to the cost of newsgathering because it would slant reportage and, for this reason, the public has the right to know.

Not declaring the sponsorship of a Zionist Organisation – the South African Jewish Board of Deputies – as they have all admitted, is a violation of the code. On a PowerFM radio show, the editor of the Sunday Times Makhudu Sefara recently reiterated their position that not declaring the sponsor was an error: they forgot. This is a feeble excuse, as experienced professionals (with over 90 years of top class journalistic and editorial experience, collectively) do not make such basic errors. Nor do three media houses which apparently do not work together all act in the same way—or make the same error—to evade public trust. The common factor in their relationship is the Zionist organisation behind the sponsorship. The denial that they acted in conspiracy, however, is still being played out at the Press Council.

The complainant in this case has asked that these papers apologise fully and across all platforms. In addition, in the redress measures a call was made for them to include a public seminar and, for the Times, to “contribute to a good Palestinian cause, and/or donate to the Palestinian victims of Israeli violence (mostly women and children) in Gaza”. In addition, since the groups like the Sunday Times know of the Gift of the Givers’ work, they could use their services to obtain a real voice from the victims of the genocide and/or advice on the good Palesinian causes that the newspaper had to donate to.

Whilst the complainant initially requested a public seminar, this has moved on. Given the other scandals surrounding ethics in the media, I and the two media activist groups quoted above truly believe that the Press Council must convene a similar inquiry into media ethics and credibility (the Satchwell report which was  which was commissioned by the South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF) some five years ago. The South African Human Rights investigation into racism in the media held in 1998 may also prove to be inspirational. These could serve as models for the Press Council if they can mobilise the political will to convene such an investigation. Our society needs it.

The fourth estate?

The role of the fourth estate, the press, is to be a check on power, but what happens if it is compromised? Around the time when the journalists were being compromised and pampered, nine members of parliament went on a secret fact finding mission to Israel. This was brought to public attention by the Good Party’s MP Brett Herron, who questioned the purpose for such a trip. The trip was also sponsored by the SA Zionist Federation (SAZF)  through its affiliate the South African Friends of Israel also hid the fact that they were on a junket to Israel – Palestine. The fact that it was secret has been countered more recently, but it begs the question: why was the 11-minute Facebook video recorded in Israel and shared by PA MP Ashley Sauls so hastily deleted? Its contents were factual as IOL reported that Sauls and the delegation had already met with a governor and were scheduled to meet with the president.

At the end of the trip, SAFI director Daniel Jackobi spoke directly to the media when he said that it “… will confirm with South African media, that there was no evidence of Apartheid and, to the contrary, Israel is a vibrant progressive multi-racial and multi-ethnic society, in which the rights of all citizens are protected and upheld by the rule of law.”

What is obvious is that these nine MPs failed to meet the Israeli Human Rights groups B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, whose reports – released at a press conference in Jerusalem in July – confirmed that Israel was carrying out “coordinated, deliberate action to destroy Palestinian society in the Gaza strip”.

The MPs concerned are described as a group of 15 South African parliamentarians visiting Israel to show “faith based support for the Jewish state and a rebuke to the Middle East policies of the ruling African National Congress”. They come from the Democratic Alliance (DA), the African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP), and Patriotic Alliance (PA). They visited Israel, meeting President Isaac Herzog and officials. When they were asked in terms of the parliament code of ethics, the discrepancies in their declarations reveal that they have something to hide than what is on it. The DA junket team has provided different reasons for this trip: Emma Powell: Study tour & sightseeing; Bridget Masango: Religious trip; and Mlondi Mdluli & Bonginkosi Madikizela: Fact-finding mission. In addition, Glynnis Breytenbach, Nicholas Myburgh, Katherine Christie declared it as a gift (R110,000 each). Around this time, UK MPs from the Labour Party were apparently on a similar junket costing about 2,600 pounds per person.

The ACDP’s Steve Swart declared it as a fact-finding and a religious visit. The PA’s Ashley Sauls said he went to understand the Israel-Hamas conflict, whilst his counterpart Millicent Mathopa (PA) did not declare the trip.

Given that both the DA and the PA are members of the Government of National Unity (GNU), it was surprising that they would go against the country’s foreign policy positions. The ACDP is not affiliated with the GNU but Al Jama-ah, the GOOD Party and the ANC have demanded full transparency and accountability. However, the public discussions around the media transgressions appear to be more enhanced and participatory than what we have seen in parliament.

This is tragic but explainable. The SAJBD took out the journalists (not as in physically kill, but compromised them ethically), so that these powerful media houses could not keep the Members of Parliament (MPs) to account in terms of their code of ethics. The MPs code is not too dissimilar to the Press Code and states that a Member is ethically required to:

• Avoid Conflicts of Interest and thus, not accept any reward, benefit, or gift that creates a direct conflict of interest for themselves, their family, or their business partners.
• Reject Corruption means that they must not accept any gift that is intended to corruptly influence them in their official duties.
• No to influence Peddling: They must not use their position as a public representative to improperly gain a financial or business advantage for themselves, their family, or their business partners when dealing with an organ of State. If this was a business venture and such conduct transpired they could variously be accused of insider trading amongst other ills. Were they conspiring against the SA Govt, many MPs want to know.

We can learn from civil society in the UK

Our politicians and civil society groups have some catching up to do. Studies by activists in the UK recently revealed that some 180 of Britain’s 650 MPs in the last parliament have accepted pro-Israel lobby bucks during their political career. The figure is cross party and includes 130 Conservative MPs, 41 Labour MPs and three Liberal Democrats. The other three members of parliament came from the DUP, two independents and one from Reform. The report held that the total value of these individuals and Israeli state institutions amounts to over one million pounds. “between them, the politicians made over 240 paid-for trips to Israel, at a cost of over half a million pounds.” Some 15 MPs received funding like our South African ones to travel to Israel amid the Palestinian genocide in Gaza.

Huda Ammori, the co-founder of the direct action network Palestine Action, told Declassified: “Accepting funding from a lobby group on behalf of the perpetrators of a genocide should immediately bar anyone from standing as an MP.  … To see how politicians continue to travel to Israel and engage with the genocide lobby explains why our government continues to defy international law by facilitating Israel’s war crimes”. 

An executive member of the PSA has said that this is “do-able in South Africa” and we must reclaim the parliament and stand united against genocide which is our obligation under the Genocide Convention.

As I conclude this story, Palestine Action is resisting an unlawful ban on its activities. The Guardian reports that “protesters at the next mass demonstration against the ban on Palestine Action will withhold their details from officers to force en-masse processing at police stations in an effort to make it ‘practically impossible’ to arrest everyone.”

But there are regrets too, and former cabinet minister Peter Hain said that the UK government was “digging itself into a hole” over Palestine Action and that fellow Labour peers and MPs were regretting voting to ban the group. He was one of three Labour members of the Lords to vote against banning the group in July.

These UK MPs are correct that these measures of proscription against groups campaigning against  genocide in Palestine undermines civil liberties and democracy in the wider society.

* Hassen Lorgat is a social justice activist who has worked in trade union and anti-apartheid sports movements.

** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media. 

Source link