ANC Zanufication of the media is a non-starter

Cope leader Mosiuoa Lekota — addressing journalists in Bloemfontein — has warned that the media would come under pressure from the ruling party in the near future. In response to questions about who would be the leaders of the new party, he advised that this was a work in progress but that of greater concern should be the amount of press freedom the country would enjoy under the ANC.

Undoubtedly Lekota was making reference to the fact that during the year press freedom was under attack from the ANC which slammed self-regulation and hinted at establishing a media tribunal to punish those who were economical with the truth. Whether the Cope leader has inside knowledge of the ANC proposing steps even more draconian than those is only known by him.

Let’s backtrack to the proposal by the ANC for a media appeals tribunal (MT). During 2007 the ANC passed a resolution to look into the possibility and feasibility of a media tribunal which resolution was confirmed at Polokwane. The MT would be accountable to Parliament, thereby placing the media under its control which by extension makes it answerable to the ruling party itself.

In short, self regulation would be replaced by a tribunal that answers to the government.

In fairness the policy conference of 2007 which introduced the resolution was then under the leadership of former president Thabo Mbeki while Polokwane confirmed it was under the control of current ANC president Jacob Zuma. In other words the faction from where Cope emerged were instrumental in putting the proposition forward while the Zuma led ANC ratified it.

Accordingly for Lekota, as part of that Mbeki faction, to hold himself out as the champion of press freedom is cheeky to say the least.

Where was Mosiuoa when the resolution was first introduced?

No doubt the catalyst giving rise to the resolution was the ongoing faction fight between Zuma and Mbeki and the media’s extensive coverage thereof. The ruling party and its senior leadership were coming under intense scrutiny and the negative publicity was overwhelming. Something had to be done to bring the media under control.

The media in its turn rallied immediately by pointing out that “freedom of expression” and media freedom form part of the South African Constitution and this MT would be a direct attack on those freedoms.

Undoubtedly with the ANC, Cope and the Democratic Alliance about to commence tabling their manifestos for the coming election, this issue is going to be raised repeatedly over the coming months. The necessity of gaining clarity on where each party stands on media regulation before the election cannot be underestimated. The difference between the abuse of power we are witnessing in Zimbabwe and a ruling party answerable to the public because they have been kept informed of instances of corruption, neglect and abuse is what is at stake.

In terms of the current leadership of the ANC, it is somewhat staggering that they are even contemplating curbs on the media when Zuma himself owes his current ascendancy and indeed his political survival to the media.

No?

What would have happened to JZ if the media had been denied reporting on the use of state organs to pursue the ANC president? The public would have been advised through pro-government press that Zuma is a threat to national security and must be placed under arrest or house arrest. In the same way that Tsvangirai has been painted in the official press in Zimbabwe, so too would Zuma have been whereafter he would have disappeared into disgraced oblivion and woe betide anyone who raised any criticism of it.

When that resolution was tabled in 2007, Zuma was the enemy of those in control and the only inference that I can draw from it being initiated was that the media needed to be brought under control in order to ensure that the faction fight spun one way and it was not in favour of JZ. At Polokwane, the situation had evolved to leave Zuma in control whereafter, as a result of the publicity surrounding him and other senior leaders, that faction deemed it necessary to run with the ball.

The great irony being that Cope could be hoisted by their “own” petard in that it was members of their faction — while they were with the ANC — that initiated this.

All parties must bear in mind that the media that Mugabe and the Zanu-PF “tamed” is a vastly different proposition to the current set up. The advent of the internet has made it almost impossible to control the informal sector and any attempt to reign in the mainstream media will backfire drastically on those proposing it. All that will happen is that the credible press will be made up of independents and the scathing external media.

Zimbabwe is a fine example of this in operation.

The Herald plus a handful of pro-Zanu-PF websites plays planet Earth.

The media is front and centre the greatest protection that the citizens of South Africa or any country has against abuse of power. In the case of Jacob Zuma we have tangible proof of how vital it can be in rescuing him from oblivion while keeping him under scrutiny for past conduct.

Do not deny South Africans the right to a free and self regulated media.