The benefits and hazards of self-regulatory digital media in South Africa
By John Stupart
Press freedom is guaranteed in Section 16 of the South African Constitution and, while organisations do exist to provide a framework for best practices, and a code of conduct, for print and online media, the code is rarely followed to the letter and cannot be enforced in practice. Media operations can, instead, choose how they are governed. Where broadcast media are overseen by the Broadcasting Complaints Commission, the demands of media owners and institutional knowledge among senior section heads will often influence the editorial decisions of print and digital news media websites.
Regulation in South Africa in a nutshell
Print and online news organisations who choose to be regulated by an outside body, adhere to the Press Code as prescribed by the Press Council, an independent, voluntary media body.
Most of those who do not adhere to the Press Code, from the Independent Media group to the Daily Maverick, allocate resources to an internal regulatory system that is not answerable to the Press Council. The effects of this regulatory approach can be best explained through two examples: the ‘decuplets saga’ told by the Independent group’s news outlets and the misleading report by investigative reporter Jacques Pauw published by Daily Maverick.
In the case of the former, Independent allowed but then ignored the findings of an internal investigation into their false news report on the decuplets’ birth story. In the case of the latter, self-regulation helped Daily Maverick successfully respond to a false news report that could have undermined readers’ trust without larger sanction.
With no requirement to adhere to particular standards, it falls to the integrity of individual organisations to determine whether standards are upheld or outright ignored.
Self-regulation in the United Kingdom
On the face of it, this type of internal oversight may appear similar to the Readers’ Editor model adopted by the UK’s Guardian newspaper, where investigations into reader complaints are carried out by their own, in-house ombud or ‘Readers’ Editor’, answerable to an ethics board and not the newspaper’s editor. As applied at The Guardian, this can defuse and resolve issued before they become major problems. The Guardian itself is owned by the Scott Trust, which operates to a clear mission statement and employs the Readers’ Editor.
In South Africa, the Independent’s Ombud, by contrast, is ultimately answerable to its editorial heads and, worse, their owner – not a trust – and enjoys neither freedom of opinion nor the ability to enforce decisions, as explained below.
In such a regulatory environment, South African digital outlets can fail to uphold their declared standards and defend themselves against challenges when they arise. A voluntary media association, the South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF), can assist in evaluating general codes of conduct and media ethics if media ask but has no power to require this.
Independent’s rogue approach to decuplets hoax
In June 2021, the Pretoria News, owned by the Independent Media group, published a sensational article by journalist Piet Rampedi, reporting the birth of decuplets to a South African family. The story quickly gained international attention, but, when independent evidence of the decuplets’ birth never arrived, doubts over the story’s veracity grew.
Independent Media is not a party to the Press Council, and thus not subject to investigation by its ombud. Rather, the organisation had its own ‘internal’ ombud team investigate and in July 2021 this body determined the story was indeed a hoax, and recommended full, organisation-wide apologies to be published online and in print.
Rather than follow the recommendation, Independent produced a multi-part video ‘documentary’ suggesting the babies were supposedly trafficked from the hospital itself. With little to no evidence proving this, the Department of Health opted to sue Independent. As a consequence of the failure of its internal review process, the authorities turned to legal challenges.
Daily Maverick’s self-correction at work
Meanwhile, In February 2021, investigative journalist Jacques Pauw published through Daily Maverick a lengthy first-person account of his ordeal of being put under arrest after a day spent at a local restaurant. Given the storied character of Pauw as a veteran award-winning journalist, his account was published without sufficient internal inspection. The story however turned out to be a significantly flawed account of events and drew national criticism of Daily Maverick for publishing the piece.
The reaction within Daily Maverick’s senior staff was fundamentally different from that seen at Independent Media. While a member of, and subject to the Press Council, Daily Maverick opted to pre-emptively investigate Pauw’s story soon after its veracity was questioned, ultimately publishing a lengthy explanation of the story, how it got to be published, an apology, and a vow to do better in the future.
Neither case taken before the Press Council
The fact the Press Council was not directly involved is indicative of just how ineffective it is in directing sound journalistic practices in South Africa. Although in both examples the internal reviews arrived at satisfactory conclusions, one was followed through (Daily Maverick) and one was not (Independent Media).
Membership of the Press Council not being a requirement in law, the impetus for reader- funded media to be trusted by and valuable to readers with numerous alternative news sources is significant. While this may potentially leave organisations vulnerable to pandering to readership, it can also present a good opportunity for the establishment of sound regulatory frameworks driven by readers: a Scott Trust, funded by the public.
Achieving such a policy could be attractive but would require a margin of profitability not-yet enjoyed by non-state, non-commercially-funded media. Even News24, a South African media powerhouse, enjoys significant funding by Naspers, thereby enabling both an internal ombud and Press Council adherence. For smaller budgets, using even a fraction of membership funding to replace or augment a Press Council membership remains a very hard sell.
References
- Constitution of South Africa 1996, Chapter 2, Section 16. P07, https://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/constitution/saconstitution-web-eng.pdf
- Press Council Code of Conduct, https://presscouncil.org.za/ContentPage?code=PRESSCODE
- Broadcasting Complaints Commission, https://www.bccsa.co.za
- Daily Maverick. Revealed: Independent Media’s internal report on Piet Rampedi’s decuplets story found it was a hoax and demanded an apology. 29 Oct 2021, https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-10-29-revealed-independent-medias-internal-report-on-piet-rampedis-decuplets-story-found-it-was-a-hoax-and-demanded-an-apology/
- Scott Trust. The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/the-scott-trust
- Rampedi, Piet. Exclusive: Gauteng woman gives birth to 10 children, breaks Guinness World Record. IOL. 8 June 2021, https://www.iol.co.za/pretoria-news/news/exclusive-gauteng-woman-gives-birth-to-10-children-breaks-guinness-world-record-5ba8c9e2-5cc6-49b3-8cc9-1e179fd535cd
- Daily Maverick, “Jacques Pauw Affair: The Story, The Facts, The Fallout and The Future”. 19 February 2021, https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-02-19-jacques-pauw-affair-the-story-the-facts-the-fallout-and-the-future/