Voltaire once said that man is born free, but is everywhere in chains. And what better example than the latest government onslaught against our constitution?
We are faced with two potentially draconian pieces of legislation – the Protection of Information Bill, and a posited statutory Media Tribunal (see http://www.mg.co.za/article/2010-08-02-press-council-warns-against-media-tribunal and http://www.mg.co.za/article/2010-08-07-law-society-concerned-at-threat-to-media-freedom). And what is vital to remember, is that the Information Bill in particular does not just affect the media – it affects all freedoms set out in Item 16 of the Bill of Rights in our constitution, including freedom of the press and other media, freedom of artistic creativity, the freedom to receive or impart information or ideas, and academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.
In essence, it affects every single one of us.
South Africa, it seems, has to choose between two fundamentally different and incompatible positions. The first is an assumption that media freedom is indispensable in building and maintaining democratic societies.
In other words, you could argue that the healthier the press in any country, the healthier the body politic. It is important to remember that the press is not a passive indicator – it can play a vital role in influencing and shaping events and values. As many have pointed out, no matter what is wrong with a society, if the media is free, the facts cannot be concealed forever – which is why so many people argue that media freedom is the key to all other freedoms.
The opposing position – which for many years has characterised South Africa’s experience – is that media freedom is a luxury beyond the reach of politically unstable societies.
In this view, a certain level of press freedom may be tolerable, but invariably the government’s bias is towards decreasing that freedom, or at least containing that which already exists. In other words, such governments tend to argue that press freedom is not a right, but a privilege that carries responsibilities – and this undoubtedly leads to the authoritative view that the public has a right to be informed only when is in the interests of the state.
This view emphasises the harm that the press can do. Public discussion inevitably turns to irresponsibility and sensationalism - an evil which governments and politicians are forced to suffer.
In other words, the granting of press freedom is conditional on acceptable performance.
But the price of liberty is this: a free society, which expects responsible conduct from a free press, must go on tolerating and even expect some irresponsibility. Media freedom doesn’t come with any guarantees.
Thus this is the dilemma of developing nations: does one wait until the country has a sufficiently democratic culture to tolerate a free press, or does one allow press freedom to help cultivate a democratic culture?
What would a normal or healthy standard of press freedom be?
According to academic Dennis McQuail, there are seven principles:
• Publications should be free from censorship by any third party;
• The act of publication and distribution should be open to a person or group without a permit or licence;
• Attacks on any governments, officials or political parties (as distinct from attacks on any private individuals
or treason or breaches of security) should not be punishable, even after the event;
• There should be no compulsion to publish anything;
• Publication of “error” is protected equally with that of truth, in matters of opinion and belief;
• No restriction should be placed on the collection, by legal means, of information for publication; and
• There should be no restriction on the export or import, or sending and receiving “messages”, across
international frontiers.
This is the key: if press freedom is to survive, the majority of people must accept it.
There are many factors favouring media freedom in South Africa. Many of us, whether within or without the established media, remember clearly the times when our freedoms were restricted, and we are used to fighting!
And all South African journalists, crossing all media types, are basically in agreement, together with a broader cultural base including churches, some political parties, trade unions and cultural groups.
Perhaps most importantly, one assumes the ANC knows the rest of the world (as well as those in South Africa) are constantly comparing their human rights record with that of the National Party during apartheid.
However, there are equally many factors impeding press freedom, not least an absolute intolerance of free expression. Old habits die hard, and from official circles we have always received an ill-defined commitment to any media freedom; apart from the Bill of Rights, there has never been a clearly articulated stand on the issue from the ANC, for example.
Added to that, a general African legacy of human rights isn’t a promising influence for any South African government – we don’t have to look too far, for example, for ways of dealing with a dissident press.
And political expediency, as ever, plays a role. Groups tend to view media freedom instrumentally – it is only valued so long as it is helping them.
I believe South Africans simply cannot allow current legislative threats to develop any further. We have come so far, and we have united as a diverse nation; we are managing to hold our leaders accountable, and we are building, together, a beautiful country. Do we really want to sit back and allow this to be taken from us?
In the words of David Bowman, former editor in chief of the Sydney Morning Herald, looking at the issue historically, you could say that what we are now facing is the second great battle for a freedom we can no longer afford to take for granted.
See also:
http://www.mg.co.za/article/2010-08-08-malema-the-media-think-they-are-untouchable
http://www.mg.co.za/article/2010-08-06-sunday-times-reporter-free-on-r5-000-bail
http://www.mg.co.za/article/2010-08-02-nzimande-sa-media-is-threat-to-democracy
http://www.mg.co.za/article/2010-07-30-media-tribunal-would-be-a-very-dangerous-move
http://www.timeslive.co.za/sundaytimes/article591780.ece/Journalists-harrowing-account
http://www.timeslive.co.za/sundaytimes/article591789.ece/United-we-stand--Auckland-Park-declaration
http://www.timeslive.co.za/sundaytimes/article591773.ece/Senior-Policemans-startling-admission--Arrest-was-political
No comments:
Post a Comment