Journalists, go back to class

Let’s talk media ethics. Journalists are taught that not only should they strive to deliver the story to their news editor within the specified deadline, but that they should also present it as accurately and as objectively as possible. Independence, independence, independence. That is unfortunately, mostly theoretical. Situations in real newsrooms do not tend to be so radiant.

On paper, this would obviously mean that as a journalist reporting on a story, I cannot place my allegiance with any political party, the government, or any business – among others. I cannot write a story on corruption to express favouritism and assign guilt to any party. Is that even what journalists are there for?

When former Cape Argus journalist Ashley Smith admitted to pocketing tens of thousands of rands in bribes in exchange for writing positively about former Western Cape premier Ebrahim Rasool, I thought of just how foiled things can get when we leave the classroom. Apart from that, Smith admitted to acting as a paid media strategist and advisor to Rasool.

Smith’s exercise was sponsored by public funds. Mind you, this is all occurring in a country riddled with service delivery protests, as ordinary people struggle to access the most basic of services.

That goes against everything journalists should be. Newly formed media organisation Projourn (Professional Journalists’ Association of SA) agrees, having released a statement befittingly titled “chequebook journalism’ abhorrent and unacceptable.

The organisation even compared the unethical acts to journalists who accepted bribes to candy coat apartheid, which we all know there is nothing sweet about.

Projourn also lauded Cape Argus on its approach of the issue. The newspaper carried a story on the allegations against Smith who worked as a senior political journalist and fellow former employee Joe Aranes. Aranes was former political editor.

“The admission by the Cape Argus, in a rare front page leader, that it failed its readers in this matter, as well as the editor’s reaffirmation of the paper’s core values is to be commended,” Projourn said.

Brown resigned from the newspaper during a disciplinary inquiry into the allegations. His actions, Projourn says, have brought journalism in South Africa into disrepute.

“Not only do we support those stalwart journalists who resist the demands that they be partisan in their reportage, but we abhor those who cross the line and succumb to the temptations of “chequebook journalism.”

Non-journalists, too, have opinions. On many occasions, I have been party to conversations in which normal people were bashing journalists. They seem to view them as nonobjective and full of lies in their reporting. While I do not completely support the statement, I will not just toss it away. Journalists are, before all else, human. They have issues, opinions, flaws, and sometimes ulterior motives. Many times, these do reflect in their work – be it for a good or bad purpose.

Now, as the Fourth Estate of society, journalists have a duty to society. They cannot sign up to fail, as that would mean failing society itself. Go back to the theories which were taught in class.

The vuvuzela really must be annoying

The vuvuzela really must be annoying. Comedian Trevor Noah described it on Twitter as being "obnoxious" and "loud" - going as far as likening it to wayward ANC Youth League president Julius Malema.

There have been resounding calls to have it banned from World Cup matches. Popular goal-netters like Portugal's Cristiano Ronaldo and Argentina's Lionel Messi have expressed displeasure at the metre-long instrument South Africans love so much. FIFA president Sepp Blatter has (thankfuly) somewhat expressed support for the vuvuzela, also through Twitter.

Teams have blasted the 'plastic trumpet' - claiming that it hampers their communication on the field. Some audiologists have said that the vuvuzela has the potential to cause permanent hearing loss over time.

Self-appointed critics of the vuvuzela need to respect the fact that this is South Africa, and when soccer is concerned, the vuvuzela is culture. Blowing it is the country's signature celebration.

Let's face it, the vast majority of those too quick to criticise and judge the vuvuzela have never even blown one. Their lips, it seems, open to criticise them - not to examine them. They are so narrow minded that they deprive themselves of the infectious and joyous blowing locals are so fond of. Ai, deal with it.

Today I envied South Africa

Writer's block was hellbent on having its way with me, but I decided to publish this either way:

Today I envied South Africa

I witnessed her enthused children honor her in earnest. They unashamedly blasted their plastic trumpets – vuvuzelas as they passionately label them.

Many others preferred silence. Nevertheless, they were beaming with unprecedented pride and joy. Adoring crowds within her offspring received the rest of the world for their winter stay down south.

The world's greatest stars had landed, there to illustrate their ball tricks on her groomed grounds.

Her own representatives donned gold and green. Their recent wins had indisputably captured the support of their inconsistent country.

I observed that swollen lips were really no stranger to her many children. A handful of whom you would incorrectly assume blew vuvuzelas for a living. Dusk, dawn and in between, vuvuzelas sounded. In all areas – rural, remote, urban, and wealthy – they still sounded.

Her children's minds were palpably stuck on a winning atmosphere, as euphoria clung to the roof of their mouths. Their waving flags shook critics who doubted her capability. She exceeded expectations and stood tall against disapproval; momentarily deafening pesky pessimists.

Her children had breathed new meaning to the word ‘patriotism'. The Soccer World Cup had arrived in South Africa, and they said they were ‘feeling it'. While I, the rest of the world, watched and envied South Africa.