 South African media not on the high road  Since
the
ANC National General Council in September 2010 a consideration
has been
made for a public enquiry on an external media regulatory
framework to bolster
the country's media self regulatory mechanism. This consideration has been met with fierce resistance from the majority of media houses and some within civil society. I want to argue that the resistance borders on misplaced hysteria, if not simply mischief. The bulk of the anti-media appeals tribunal brigade's analysis seem to advance a notion that external media regulation is in itself a threat to the right to press freedom as well as individuals' right to freedom of _expression_. Their mantra seems to be that once media's self regulation is complemented by an external regulatory framework, it will threaten press freedom. They also pontificate that any external regulation is also a threat to individual's right to freedom of _expression_. These analysis seem inflated, if not confuted to me. The real question that the media ought to interrogate is who watches over the watchdogs? In my view it ought to be an external body that is democratically constituted such as the considered Media Appeals Tribunal. The self regulation mechanism does not go far enough and is inadequate. Why We Need an External Media Appeals Tribunal? To countenance the power of the media that is essentially an independent capitalist enterprise yet it performs a public function. To promote accountability, fair and truthful reporting, and guard against the hijacking of this important enterprise by people with vested self-interest i.e. anonymous sources, untrustworthy politicians, unscrupulous journalists and editors. To complement the existing self-regulatory regime that is currently viewed as ineffective and toothless - what with page 'two' apologies? To promote ethical reporting and respect for people's right to privacy and their inherent dignity. Powers of the Media Appeals Tribunal Instead of hysteria, we need to have a conversation about the modalities of the Media Appeal Tribunal and the National Assembly as directed by the ANC’s National General Council needs to conduct the hearings in earnest. The wait for the outcome of review by the Press Ombudsman and Press Council is dragging on too long. I’m of the firm view that the Media Tribunal ought not to have powers to throw journalists into jail. Frankly such powers belong to the judiciary and such a tribunal should not be part of a judiciary. However, it must have the power to subpoena journalists to testify before it in cases of any alleged breaches of the press code of conduct. In the nutshell the Media Tribunal should: Have power to slap fines on media houses and in rare cases journalists for malicious reporting. Fines should be reasonable and justifiable. Perhaps a miniature percent of the media house's annual profit. Have the power to order front page detailed and prominent apologies in cases of gross untruthful reporting, such prominent apologies should also extend to other papers who syndicated the erroneous story. Tribunal Composition, Funding and Functions The Tribunal should be chaired by a retired judge appointed by the President of the Republic. The Judge shall be a man or woman of sober habits, with an unblemished record of advancing and defending human rights and knowledge of media law. The President should appoint such a judge on the list submitted by Parliament or the Judicial Services Commission. At least 50% members shall be drawn from a list submitted by a collective of media houses. The remainder shall be appointed from a list submitted by civil society organisations and members of the public. It should report annually to Parliament. It shall be funded jointly on 50-50 basis by media houses and the taxpayers through funds appropriation in the national budget. The Tribunal should conduct regular research, surveys, and training in-order to advance ethical reporting. The Tribunal should also investigate controversial stories even if no complain is laid before it. Appropriate sanctions should be dished-out to all deserving transgressors. Persons unhappy with the Tribunal ruling should reserve the right to approach the courts for a review. In conclusion, I want to argue that media houses should have a register of anonymous sources. Only the journalist concerned, editor and Chairperson of the Tribunal should have access to the register. This will go a long way in minimizing defective stories that appears in the press regularly masquerading as investigative journalism. No amount of falsehood will deter some of us in advocating for an external regulatory framework. It cannot be that the media continues to be the only institution that is allowed to play referee and player simultaneously. This type of regulatory environment already exists for the health professionals and the legal fraternity.
You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] . |
