ANC versus BBC: a battle of words and images
February 27th, 2007
The furious attack on the BBC by ANC representative Smuts Ngonyama has been replaced on the ruling party’s website by a full text of the BBC’s response and a much more conciliatory statement by Ngonyama. Perhaps someone told Ngonyama that he had overstepped the mark.
The BBC piece on crime in South Africa, put together by senior correspondent and veteran South Africa-hand John Simpson on the eve of President Thabo Mbeki’s state of the nation speech, was open to criticism. (You can view it here and form your own view). It was overly dramatic, pictured our country as one that sometimes “rivals Iraq” for violence, with pictures of Simpson in a helicopter flying over the city centre as if he can’t walk the streets. It seems our country is overun by “as many as 12-million illegal immigrants”, most from the rest of Africa. It fails to differentiate between Hillbrow and other parts of the city and left one with a crude impression of a place “at war with itself”.
Having said that, Ngonyama was ill-considered in saying a “racist” BBC was making a “deliberate attempt … to insert itself as a player in the determination of our future as a people”. (See full statement here.)
The BBC responded with traditional restraint: “We do not accept the ANC’s comments or analysis of our coverage, and will
continue to cover South African news and business stories on BBC World accurately and in-depth.” The BBC pointed out that this was just one isolated example of a full range of coverage, reports, interviews, and other material it had done about South African in recent weeks.
Ngonyana’s comeback this week was notably more considered than his initial outburst: “We have the greatest respect for John Simpson, and understand that it would be wrong to attribute specifically to him an assessment about our country that he would never be able to make, in his own name, unless he had spent time in South Africa today, and not yesterday, personally to understand our reality. We do indeed hope that the BBC will continue ‘to cover South African news and business stories on BBC World accurately and in-depth’. We will continue to respect the BBC if it keeps to its word in this regard, even in the context of the occasional instances when we may publicly or privately disagree with its conclusions.”
That’s a relief. Ngonyama’s first outburst was unworthy of him or his party, and destructive of any relationship with a respected international voice like the BBC. Criticise them, please, but let’s not go totally over the top.
The bottom line is that South Africa looked foolish in the report for three very important reasons:
- President Mbeki was dismissing the suggestion that crime was running out of control
- Simpson said our commissioner of police had been “found to have close links to the mafia” (Ngonyama took umbrage at this, saying rather foolishly that it was the first he had heard of it. Okay, Smuts, it wasn’t literally the Italian mafia, but it was someone currently on trial for murder and drug dealing. Would you have been happier if the BBC had said that?)
- Simpson said the government had refused to appear in his report. Ngonyama says it wasn’t that they refused, but they were not given enough time and were misled about the subject of the report, when senior leadership was tied up in the Adelaide Tambo funeral and then the opening of Parliament. In fact, they were given about four days to produce someone to speak to Simpson.
The truth is that if we are always going to come off looking bad if our President says such foolish things, if the ANC is not prepared to admit and face up to the fact that there is something very wrong with a chief of police who is friendly with alleged leaders of organised crime and if we can’t produce some senior person to talk to the BBC within, say, 24 hours.
We can blame Simpson nd the BBC as much as we like, but we have a lot of our own work to do to ensure that we come across better in the international media.
Entry Filed under: Anton Harber, Journalism, TV
9 Comments Add your own
1. James | March 2nd, 2007 at 1:26 pm
Why do you say it was Smuts Ngonyama who wrote the original article? It reads like classic Mbeki to me. He lashed out in a very similar way in ANC Today when he was under pressure on AIDS and Zimbabwe.
2. Ahmed | March 2nd, 2007 at 6:01 pm
The above analysis of Ngonyama’s initial reaction and (subsequent) calmer response is fairly logical. However, in-depth analysis should not be eagerly anticipated by us from the BBC. Instead, as critical media analysts, we should concern ourselves with discussing, at length, the implications foreign media’s (such as the BBC) representations bear firstly on ousider perceptions of the country, and secondly, how these representations may be fundamentally flawed when considering certain political economic ‘limitations’ such big media enterprises attempt to divert our attention from in their so-called in-depth coverage.
3. Anton | March 4th, 2007 at 9:32 am
Smuts claimed responsibilty for the article, and I accepted that at face value. It would not be the first time someone took responsibility for words that the president wrote, but is not willing to say himself. - Anton
4. James | March 6th, 2007 at 10:52 am
Yup, looks to me like Smuts took the bullet for TM on this one.
5. Dave Tootill | March 14th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
Anton wrote in Business Day today. He compared the BBC being over the top with the ANC column. I’ve been wondering since the original furore why anyone would attack the credibility of John Simpson, given his track record, even if that of the BBC. I must admit I missed that Simpson report, but I saw the following week they ran something similar on Brazil, and actually more ‘insulting’, with gun battles in the streets against the police. Nobody seems to have mentioned that show. I suppose any reporter can have an off-day, & maybe a producer twisted it, but I’d bet on Simpson, even against Anton.
6. Dave Tootill | March 15th, 2007 at 12:07 am
I went back and watched the RealPlayer version on Anton’s site. John Simpson 99, Anton 1. I won’t even go into the nuances of the commentary, which were misrepresented in Anton’s article. I guess someone will argue that daily life is actually not that brutal in Iraq & Afghanistan, which are I suppose the more recognised haunts of John Simpson. Anton, I normally take everything you say on trust, but are you just being politically correct in even suspecting Simpson of being over the top; or can you argue that Simpson is getting past it? That’s a whole long debate.
7. Anton | March 15th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
Lesson number one of good journalism: trust nobody, take nothing at face value, be sceptical of everything - especially things I write. - Anton
8. Richard Mgamba | April 22nd, 2007 at 6:42 pm
I have been in South Africa several times for education and business mission.
Before I touched the beutiful land of this wonderful country, I had a negative picture of a country of looters, robbers, gangs, thugs and every kinds of crimes you can name.
But during my three months stay in Johannesburg, I came to realise the following things:-
First it is true that there’s crime in South Africa but not at the extent which the western and some local medias wants us to believe.
Second, it should be noticed that South Africans achieved their independence and true democracy just a bout a decade ago and it won’r be easy to solve problems that were created for hundred of years for a single night.
You willl agree with me that the ongoing crime in South Africa has got its roots into pre-apartheid history as well as the influx of illegal immigrants from African countries who see this country as their only hope to survive economically.
I am from Tanzania, but one thing I have been telling my fellow Africans is that “we didnt support the liberation struggle in South Africa in exchange with illegal immigrants.’
Yes it is true that crime is there in South Africa but it has never reached at the extent ogf being taken as a serious threat like the situation in Iraq and this is a total propaganda.
The Western medias as well as their governments are highly dominated by double standards. They will give travel warnings to tourists visiting Kenya, Zanzibar or Tanzania but won’t do so for Israel where security situation is pathetic due to sucide bombers.
They will put travel ban on Kenyan ministers under the allegations of Corruptions, but will hug and give a warm welcome to Abramovich who is also part and parcel of corruption generation and the mafia links.
South Africa is in transition period of building a peaceful and a united country with equal social, economic and political status. This should be the focus of all South Africans but at the same time effective measures should be taken to curb the ongoing crimes as well as illegal immigrants.
It will take years to end crimes in South Africa but the good thing is that today we are discussing the free South Africa with democratic government. As an African this is a unique achievements that should be nurtured by building a lovely and peaceful country for the current and future generations.
Viva South Africa. Vuga Sizwe.
RICHARD MGAMBA
JOURNALIST
MWANZA, TANZANIA
+255 784 841220
9. Andrew Plod | June 15th, 2007 at 11:49 am
The John Simpson story is one which should clearly be condemned in the strongest possible terms. Simpson clearly does not know what he was talking about and Mr Ngonyama did well to respond in the fashion in which he did.
The BBC feels that it can go and draw conclusions based on riding helicopters, ill-quoting leaders and generally being ruthless racists because South Africa and Africa at large are led by a predominantly black Government.
This country needs more people to take back what is ours which is a South Africa which belongs to all who live in it, not
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed