Media tribunals is a Battle of the Titans

By Zuki Mqolomba

“When the Greek god Uranus met with his wife Gaia, their son Cronus attacked Uranus with the sickle and cut off his genitals, and cast the severed member into the sea. From the blood that spilled out from Uranus and fell upon the earth, the Gigantes, Erinyes, and Meliae were produced, and from the spume from his cut genitalia, Aphrodite rose from the sea” (Nonnius, nd, xiii.435ff)

South Africa’s public discourse has been dominated by sensationalist frenzy as media houses have raged around the ruling party’s desire to institute a so-called “media tribunal”.

Whereas media activists have accused the ANC of using the state apparatus as an instrument of repression to ward off dissention, the ruling party has asserted its rights to enforce legal protections, arguing that the media apparatus is being used as an instrument of repression, wherein minority interests impose rule on an unsuspecting majority, under the guise of media freedoms, negating all forms of media responsibility.

While the motives of Government and its allies can indeed be deemed dubious, particularly bearing in mind that the call for the restrictions of media freedoms comes primarily in defense of party political interests only, one needs to understand this debate in context; all things are political ceteris peribas.

In Greek mythology, the Titanomachia or War of the Titans (also known as the Battle of the Titans, Battle of Gods, or just The Titan War) was the ten-year series of battles fought between two camps of deities, the Titans and the Olympians, who would come to reign on Mount Olympus. As in the Battle of the Titans, the tension between the state and media can be seen as a proximal function of contestations for power and ideological hegemony between two dominant powers, namely a dominant group of unelected conservatives in cahoots with neo-liberals, the democratically elected government, and broader progressive movements. Bearing in mind South Africa’s tragic history, the actions and responses of the ANC and media collectives respectively should be understood with the view that both State and Media are contested terrains and therefore not neutral, but reflect the ideological battle and power relations based on race, class and gender in our society. These cannot and should not be seen outside of contending political interests, the power contestations and the power relations between the two contending powers, generally of interest-group analysis.

Undoubtedly, the media space is a key and critical site of power, wherein interest groups can and often contend to influence public opinion on critical policy matters. The media oligarchy (monopolistic owners of media spaces) have engaged in a protracted offensive against the Peoples government and often creating impressions of crisis proportions at the helm of its leadership, shaping public attitudes and behaviors by painting very specific pictures of South Africa, relaying consistent messages about South Africa to itself and to the world. The media has not only been used to determine what issues are important enough to dominate public space, through its hegemonic control over the climate of opinion, but also how the citizenry should think about these issues.

That is why the issue of media freedom cannot be pursued in isolation of media responsibility, accountability and diversity, dependent on itself.

The establishment of an independent and broadly representative media tribunal should be welcomed as a demonstration of firm commitment not only to media freedom but a commitment to enrich the democratic process and to contribute to the building of a national democratic society.

Strengthening media responsibility and accountability is an integral and necessary component of a progressive understanding of media freedom. The right to freedom of expression should include not only the freedom of the media, but the freedom to express criticism of how the media handles its freedom, independent of itself. The formation of an independent or broadly representative media tribunal should not be seen as a form of intimidation or an attempt at censorship, though the devil is often in the details. South Africans should be able to exercise their right of recourse if media actions are frivolous, malicious or intended to narrow the scope for free expression.

In the same breadth, however, it is important to guard against state tendencies to use coercive power to subdue dissenting views and to ward off deserved criticism. In institutionalising media responsibility and accountability, the state should use its legislative powers to strengthen media freedoms in South Africa.

“…so soon as he had cut off the members with flint (sickle) and cast them from the land into the surging sea, they were swept away over the main a long time: and a white foam spread around them from the immortal flesh, and in it there grew a maiden…” (Nonnius, nd, xiii.435ff)
The sickle, though seemingly brute and vile, is often necessary in seasons of intended harvest.

Zuki Mqolomba is completing her MSocSc at the University of Cape Town