(Un)subscribing to Zille's stance on Cape Times

2015-03-17 15:08

The Western Cape Cabinet’s decision to instruct heads of departments not to renew subscriptions of the Cape Times does not bode well for media freedom – don’t be fooled by the explanations offered by Premier Helen Zille.

It is a decision as “draconian” as it was aptly described by the national editors’ forum SANEF.

Still, it is expected of the Zille cabinet, as the custodians of the province’s taxpayers’ money, to make sound decisions on spending. Therefore, it is commendable that they are mindful of (or sensitive to) “fruitless expenditure”.

That’s setting a much-needed example.

However, I could not help wondering how such a small matter – subscriptions to a newspaper – end up on the agenda of such an important meeting: that of Zille's provincial cabinet.

Understandably, the media must be of special interest to Zille, a former journalist who is now a powerful politician with the responsibility of running a province. But surely the heads of departments could have made the determination on their own that subscribing to newspapers - while newspaper cuttings are also delivered daily - constitutes “fruitless expenditure” … and not wait for a cabinet directive on the matter?

Perhaps the serious business of the cabinet meeting ended earlier than expected and the honorable Premier and her ministers had some time to spare for tea and coffee and …discussing friends and foes in the media.

The letter from provincial DG Advocate Brent Gerber to the departmental heads is dated 9 March 2015 and it reads: “Cabinet has discussed with concern the on-going decline in the quality of reporting in the Cape Times. As we get newspaper cuttings every day, Cabinet considers it to be fruitless expenditure to renew Cape Times subscriptions. You are therefore requested not to renew or initiate further subscriptions.”

The devil is in the detail of the first sentence.

It does not state that cabinet discussed the general fruitless expenditure of subscribing to newspapers while newspaper cuttings are also delivered – and paid for by Zille’s own admission on 702/CapeTalk. It also does not state that cabinet has therefore decided to put an end to all subscriptions of all newspapers for which clippings are delivered.

Or that they have resolved that media groups should be encouraged to deliver newspapers for free in return for the income they generate out of government advertising, a lá The New Age.

Instead, the sentence states that the members of the provincial cabinet of the Western Cape “has discussed with concern”, at their important cabinet meeting, “the on-going decline in the quality of reporting in the Cape Times”.

That, then, is the real issue…

Having established that, the question arises: What is the DA-led provincial cabinet’s definition of “quality reporting”? How do they measure it – or, in corporate governance speak, how do they monitor and evaluate the quality of reporting? Or is the concern over the paper’s “decline in the quality of reporting” actually, as one suspect, political sugar coating for what is really at stake here, namely the content of the reporting?

It is certainly no secret that Independent Media boss, Dr Iqbal Survé, is a close ally of the ANC. It is also not unknown that the Independent’s titles have started taking an increasingly stronger stance against the DA provincial government – in other words, and rightly so, holding them to account in the same way that the media is expected to do with the ANC-led national and local governments.

That is something Premier Zille and her Cabinet is not used to. Over the years she has succeeded in turning news angles in her favour, which says more about the media and their "quality of reporting” or ability to "handle" certain politicians. Those who ended up on Zille's wrong side would be rebuked and lectured on Journalism Practice 101. Or they would be accused of having an ANC mentality.

Zille’s explanation of the Cape Times decision comes in the form of a serious accusation against the editorial standards at the paper, painting everyone on the editorial team with the same brush: her government is “tired of plagiarism and factually inaccurate reporting”, she told Redi Tlhabi, and will no longer use – note the choice of words - “government money” to support the paper.

The more important question one should be asking is whether government subscriptions (and advertising) are dependent on a paper’s “quality of reporting” or on government’s obligation to support free enterprise with taxpayers’ money it manages – not “government money”, as Zille says – and to keep the public at large informed?

Media freedom is too critical for a healthy democracy to have a different set of rules for different newspapers and different governing parties.

News24 Voices Terms & Conditions.


AB praises selfless skipper

2010-11-21 18:15

Join the conversation!

24.com encourages commentary submitted via MyNews24. Contributions of 200 words or more will be considered for publication.

We reserve editorial discretion to decide what will be published.
Read our comments policy for guidelines on contributions.

Inside News24

Traffic Alerts
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.


Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.

Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire 24.com network.


Location Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location. If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to take affect.

Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.