The question of wheatear the ability of media and the responsibility they have to society and especially being the watch dog for government has been in the limelight. The question of the leadership of Jacob Zuma has been in discussed from 2006 right through 2010, from his sexual relationship and the problem of him having more one wife but in the real essences we are not focusing on the president but on how to hand the situation of the media.
Just last year the government offered the proposal to regulaurite media in the country. If this is successful it would mean that the media will have to check with the state before publishing any publication material wheatear in newspaper, radio and television. Of course this will reduce the full ability to be a journalist in this country.
Now some people would not understand the role of the media in our country. The media is there to act as a watchdog and also be a voice to those whom cannot be heard. They keep people of government in check and bring forward issues that would not usually be brought in front for attention. Think about if it was not for the media, this country will still be living in apartheid environment and the fruits of our democracy would not have been and still be enjoying. Nelson Mandela would have not gain for much international support if we did not have the media reporting and telling the world about his political ideologies.
South Africa is a democratic country with a constitution which has a bill of rights that makes provisions for the rights of citizens as well as institutions. These are the same rights that protect and guarantee the media from censorship. Freedom of the press and other media is protected by Section 16(1) of the constitution and grants everyone the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to receive or impart information or ideas. These are fundamental rights to democracy and they are the basis of a democratic nation.
The right to freedom of the media has also been interpreted as protecting the ‘tools of the trade’ that are integral to various forms of media. Our courts have also recognized the special role that the media play as agents of expression and protectors of democracy: ‘In a system of democracy dedicated to openness and accountability, as ours is, the especially important role of the media, both publicly and privately owned, must in view be recognized. The success of our constitutional venture depends upon full-bodied criticism of the exercise of power. This requires alert and critical citizens. But strong and independent newspapers, journals and broadcast media are needed also, if those criticisms are to be effectively voiced, and if they are to be informed with the factual content and critical perspectives that investigative journalism may provide.
South African media is not as hush as the international media but in the past years it has been tough on certain individuals for example when President Jacob Zuma was in trail for rape, the media had already gave him a verdicted which was guilty, even after he was found innocent the media still printed me as a rapist and highlighted the fact that South Africa might have a rapist as a president.
If you can remember the late Manto Tshabalala who was the Minister of Health. The media reported a story about her in the Sunday Times about the fact she drinks and smokes and jumped the line of people wanting donors because she is in a higher position. A journalist broke in the hospital where she was and stole her medical documents to verify the story and exposed her to the public nationally. Now this is very good journalism but one cannot agree that it was and still is unethical because if a journalist can break and go through your medical documents and expose you for whatever reason, could our national security be in danger? I mean in my opinion there should be things that they government does not share to the media because powerful information in words can be more dangerous than a gun or a bomb. On the other side the public had the right to know about Manto Tshabalala because she is a public figure whom is in government therefore all she does is taken seriously like if she says as a minister of health tells you to stop drinking because it does not do you any good, people will take that seriously because she is a personal in the health sector therefore whatever information she brings forward must be true.
Question of why the government would want to regulate the media is very important because we need to question of this intention. Is the government hiding something that they do not want the public to know and if so what is it? Does it have the potential to destroy or endanger the people of our country?
At the same time the media do report on things that put people in danger and even destroy the reputation in society, so if the government is taken in to question by the media for its dealings, who will put and check the media do they job correct and if no who will they have to answer to? In an article done by the Mail and Guardian reporting on what the ANCYL President Julius Malema called,” Malema: 'The media think they are untouchable”. There Malema makes comments about the media not having their facts straight when reporting a story and putting inncent people in danger referring to his situation and he said the media had put him and his family's lives in danger after the death of AWB leader Eugene Terre'blanche by suggesting that "Malema's songs had contributed" to the murder incident.
In some way it is understandable why he would say because blaming someone for such an act and saying he is responsible for the death of Eugene Terrblance is not right in some way but he is the person that spiked the incident.
The needs to be an understanding between the government and the media if we want this situation between them to be solved. The media should not be regulated because that will decrease the full ability of the media and the right of freedom and expression will be just a fairytale we tell our children.
No comments:
Post a Comment