Publications
Partners
What is clear, is that the period of unconditional support for the approach of Ramaphosa and the ANC is over. The government withdrew from the agreement and reminded us why we should not trust them, writes Howard Feldman.
It is in times of war and of national crises that the press finds itself in a more difficult position. When things are "normal" it is fairly clear that one of the duties of media is to hold government accountable.
They are tasked with asking the uncomfortable questions that others cannot.
But when at war, and when national unity is required in order to vanquish a threat, there is a very fine line that needs to be treaded.
The United States is an example of a press that has failed to recognise this.
Instead of offering support to a president that many don’t like, they have continued, as they have always done, to find fault in Trump’s handling of the pandemic.
And whereas, how successful he has or has not been, is irrelevant to this discussion, the principle behind the approach certainly is. They have not worked to assist with national unity.
The South African press, however, has to date, understood what was required of them.
When President Cyril Ramaphosa announced the national lockdown, a good majority of South Africans stood beside him in support. All political parties made a conscious decision to do this, as did media.
The response was overwhelming and was something that many of us felt very proud of. It seemed on this occasion that the approach of the government and the people was something to be proud of.
Ramaphosa, or his government seemed to understand that reciprocity was required and returned the favour with an open, information sharing and transparent approach to the lockdown.
South Africa was kept informed and were brought into the thinking and decision-making process.
By and large, we felt (or certainly I did), that everyone was in this together.
The reciprocity that is key to the success of the campaign did not however last long, and with Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma's night of the long cigarettes, it was ended.
All of a sudden, South Africans were reminded that behind Ramaphosa stands a very dangerous, and untrustworthy party.
A party that brought the country to the brink of ruin because of greed and corruption.
And remarkably, who would be the person they would choose to speak to the nation, but none other than the candidate that the corrupt had championed as their leader.
Worse than that, she undermined the President and reversed a decision that he had already informed us of. And just like that citizens became nervous, and the pact ended.
South Africans well understood that things had changed. They understood that the contract had been revoked and that the rules were altered.
The question, however, is if media realised they now had a different role to play?
When Ramaphosa perplexingly tweeted love and adoration to the dictatorships of Iran and Venezuela, the press was largely silent.
When it emerged that more than R400m was payable to the Cubans, there seemed (to me) a tacit understanding that we should let the ANC do this without questioning too much.
And when a few publications reported that 23 of these doctors arrived having tested positive for Covid-19, it became impossible to verify if this was true or not.
Last week Minister of Transport Fikile Mbalula tweeted out a photo of French President Macron on with his wife, who is some years older than he.
The picture of Macron’s wife is a very unflattering one and seems to catch her in an unfortunate expression. Mbalula captioned the photo “President of France Macron and his wife.”
Why a minister in government would tweet anything negative about the leader of another country, especially as it pertained to his wife, is anyone’s guess.
The tweet was deleted, no statement was made, and nothing appeared in the media about it (that I could see).
Was the press right to ignore this or were they irresponsible? Surely the gross lack of judgement of a minister, accompanied by an insight into small childish pettiness is something that should not be ignored?
Why was he given a free pass? And what else are we missing?
Are the right questions being asked of government with regard to the economy, with the somewhat irrational decisions around the lockdown?
It is common knowledge that cigarettes are available and being traded with real loss to tax revenue.
Why is it that the illegal market is being strengthened and being given an opportunity when other legitimate businesses are being asked to sacrifice for the sake of health?
An interesting trend over the past two weeks has been the rise of the "alternative press".
All of a sudden, podcast presenters have become popular.
I believe it’s because they are asking the questions and having the discussions that the mainstream media is not prepared to have.
What is clear, is that the period of unconditional support for the approach of Ramaphosa and the ANC is over. The government withdrew from the agreement and reminded us why we should not trust them.
If mainstream media in South Africa is to remain relevant, then it is time that they followed suit.
- Howard Feldman is a keynote speaker and analyst. He is the author of three books and is the morning talk show host on ChaiFM.
Disclaimer: News24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24.
