ANC’s new views on the media

June 17th, 2007

The ANC’s latest discussion document on the media is more interesting for what it does not deal with than what it does deal with. Here is my analysis in a piece written for the Centre for Policy Studies.

The media is the only industry which is worthy of its own ANC policy discussion paper, reflecting the organization’s view that media is important as both a target and an engine for transformation. To understand the latest iteration of this discussion, one has to trace the trajectory of policy since 1992, which will highlight what is changed in or absent from the 2007 document.

1992-2007

The latest ANC discussion document, “Transformation of the Media�, makes use of an intriguingly selective account of the unfolding of ANC media policy since the organisation’s unbanning in 1990. It starts with the 1992 “Ready to Govern� document, which declared the ANC’s commitment to media freedom, but warned that this must be “underpinned by an equitable distribution of media resources�. Given the skewed nature of media control and access under apartheid, the ANC said in 1992, we would need “policies of affirmative action to redress the inequalities�.

The 2007 document leapfrogs from there straight to the 51st National Conference in Stellenbosch in 2002, as if there were few developments in the intermediate decade. It simply quotes the discussion papers from that conference saying “valuable progress has been made in transforming the media and challenging the legacy of apartheid, but a lot still has to be done�.

That is an anodyne account. It skips over the bitter exchanges with journalists after President Mandela’s 1994 speech to the International Press Institute and his harsh words for black journalists who were failing to deliver the transformation the ANC expected. It ignores the ANC’s assertion that the media, burdened by its past, was unable to meet the challenges of the 1990s and was hostile to the ANC and the transformation project.

In 1999, the ANC view was still tough:

“After five years of democracy, little has changed in the media environment. The ANC is still faced with a primarily hostile press corps, as media is still primarily owned and controlled by antagonistic forces with minority interests. The result has been a continuous onslaught of negative reporting on the ANC and ANC-led government.� (1999 ANC Conference Discussion Documents)

This was modified by 2002:

“ Considerable progress has been made and some significant milestones achieved with regard to ownership patterns, licensing of new media, increase of black and women journalists, repositioning of SABC, a measure of diversity in ownership with black empowerment groups and union funds controlling some of the assets …
… These are putative first steps towards the transformation of the media industry.� (Media in a Democratic South Africa, Discussion Document, ANC National Confererence, Stellenbosch Dec 2002)

But the 2002 document still lamented the lack of a media which it felt truly represented the masses:

“Despite changes (since 1994), there still is no significant media, which represents and articulates the aspirations, viewpoints and interests of the biggest constituency in the country. The functioning of the media is still rooted in its history in the political divide that has characterized South Africa since the advent of apartheid…(ANC:2002)

And the ANC still viewed the media as ideologically hostile:

“Most probably, it is in South Africa alone where a political movement that enjoys almost two thirds of electoral support does not have any media outlet that supports its programmes and functions editorially within it’s political ambit.
This state of affairs stands in contrast to the collective body of media that on any given day will take the same positions and choices as the opposition parties who collectively cannot garner more than a third of the vote in elections …
Most often than not, it is the opponents of the transformation agenda of government who find space to articulate their views.� (ANC: 2002)

2007

The gaps in this history, as told in the ANC 2007 document, masks an inexplicit shift in its critique of the media. A different language is now adopted, and a modified set of concerns articulated. Gone is the view that our media remains racially unbalanced, dominated by anachronistic views ideologically hostile to the ANC and transformation. Gone is a programme for transformation. Now the authors draw on a global critique of a media world increasingly controlled by a few conglomerates and operating under overwhelming commercial and bottom-line pressures. It is a critique stemming directly from radical American writers such as Ben Bagdikian, Robert McChesney and Noam Chomsky, who argue that the these conditions make it increasingly difficult for the news media to play the role it should in a democracy.

For example:

“The freedom of the South African media is today undermined not by the state, but by various tendencies that arise from the commercial imperatives that drive the media. The concentration of ownership, particularly in the print sector, has a particularly restrictive effect on the freedom of the media …
This is not a particularly South African phenomenon. Around the world, consolidation of media groups – and the drive to maximize profit – has led to a global homogenization of news … Despite protestations to the contrary, there are an increasing number of instances where the supposedly-sacred separation between management and the newsroom is breached, where commercial considerations influence editorial control�. “(Transformation of the Media, ANC Discussion Documents 2007)

The discussion document is therefore most notable for what has been dropped from the discourse. There is no picture of a media, structured under apartheid, which is ideologically hostile to the ANC and transformation. Now it is a standard and more universal critique of the market-driven model of a free press. The central problem now is defined as a lack of equal access to the media for those marginalized in our society, because of modes of ownership and control, and the resultant lack of diversity of voices.

The paper makes no suggestion as to whether something needs to be done about this.

Newspapers

Dealing with the newspaper sector, the discussion document acknowledges the emergence of a number of new titles, saying this suggests “a hundred flowers are blooming, a hundred schools of thought contending�. But ownership concentration limits the “range of voices and interests to be heard�, they conclude.

This is a surprisingly cursory treatment of the emergence of mass market populist tabloids, which have come to dominate and enliven an unusually dynamic newspaper market. (SA newspaper sales are up 43% in three years, according to the World Association of Newspapers.) This phenomenon means that the ANC is facing a sector transforming in ways in which they neither predicted nor intended, but need to be taken into account. Certainly, it cries out for an assessment of what impact this has had on the lack of “significant media, which represents and articulates the aspirations, viewpoints and interests of the biggest constituency in the country�. (ANC: 2002)

If one’s primary concern is diversity, and the ANC document certainly foregrounds this, then it seems strange not to take account of the fact that these papers – whether or not one likes them - are changing the nature of both audiences and content.

Broadcasting

On broadcasting, the ANC decries the lack of diversity but does not deal with the fact that the dominant conglomerate – and one that has plans aggressively to grow its share of the market with new channels and outlets – is the public broadcaster. The document does not explicitly mention recent SABC editorial controversies but does devote a paragraph to asserting that they face a “challenge� to ensure that the SABC “avoids both the perception and the reality that it is an uncritical mouthpiece for the government of the day.� The discussion document shies away from the word “independent� preferring to assert that the SABC should be non-partisan, representing in its coverage the diversity of the country but “be explicit in its commitment to national building, reconciliation, forging an inclusive national identity and the reconstruction and development of society.�

The document defines SABC funding as a major challenge, decrying the national broadcaster’s heavy reliance (over 80% of its revenue) on advertising and the constraints this imposes on its developmental function. But the paper goes no further than this, and it is a step back from the 2002 conference document which explicitly called for a new “public funded model� which would free the SABC from commercial constraints.

Community media

This year’s document maintains the long-standing position that the community media sector is extremely important for diversity, offering a media voice to those who lack access to the mainstream. The statutory body set up to address this, the MDDA, it reports without comment, made R3,5-m available to support community print media, R2,7-m for community radio and R2,4-m for small commercial media in 2006. Notably, only R7-m of the MDDA’s budget came from government, while R10-m came from the private sector.

The paper’s recommendation in this regard is mealie-mouthed: “It is necessary to look at mechanisms to ensure they (community media) have the resources and skills to sustain themselves�. Absent is a call for government to give more, to take their own statutory body more seriously, to even match what the private sector is doing. Nothing as strong as the 2002 call for public funding “for the public and community media to serve as vehicles to articulate the needs of the poor, rural people, women, labour and other marginalized communities�.

The document does suggest that more community radio licences should be considered, but this seems pointless if the issue of sustainability is not adequately addressed.

New Media

The most notable lacuna in the document, however, is the absence of substantive discussion of new media, digitalization, convergence and the way these phenomena are changing the production, delivery and consumption of information. In what must be the understatement of the year, it says “new media forms are now also achieving some prominence� but is generally dismissive, saying “internet reach remains low� and “while the internet provides greater opportunities for a greater number of people to publish views, news and other information … this hasn’t had much impact on the South African media environment�.

Absent is any discussion of the brakes on growth of internet access and the controversies which surround it (expensive telecommunications, for example) or on what may be the most crucial information issue we face: the growing digital divide between ourselves and the countries of the North. It is common purpose that our capacity to compete globally is hindered by the fact that this divide is growing, with major economic, social and political implications. Not to deal properly with this, or consider measures to address it, is a yawning chasm in the ANC’s media policy discussions.

Standards of journalism

Instead, we have a stock, unsubstantiated generalization about “poor resourcing of journalists and low standards�. For instance:
“…terms like ‘funding scandal’, ‘Islamic extremist’, ‘controversial minister’ (to many a journalist’s shame) ‘generally corrupt relationship’ are commonly applied … without a moment’s thought about their veracity or the value judgements which may inform them�. (ANC:2007)

Are we to take seriously a suggestion that throughout the profession, through all the local media, there has been “not a moment’s thought� about language choices? The truth is that there are one or two newsrooms in South Africa which are very well resourced by international standards (notably the SABC), but there is no obvious connection between resources and quality.
More pertinent for the ANC might be the fact that many members of their core constituency are becoming avid readers of mass market tabloids. This is producing its own issues of journalism quality and representation, which may have a more immediate effect on ANC politics than it seems to expect.

Conclusion

The ANC’s 2007 media policy discussion document highlights some of the important trends in our print and broadcasting sectors, but does not grapple with them in a substantive way. Most notably, it does not suggest changes in policies, regulations or structures which an ANC government can employ to address these issues. If concentration of ownership is an issue, is the ANC suggesting some special measures to address this? If community media is under-resourced, is the ANC proposing to shift some of the budget surplus towards this cause? If the SABC needs to be seen to be non-partisan, what steps are required to achieve this?

Media transformation may be taking a different form from that which was anticipated, driven by the popularity of the new tabloids, the rush of pay-TV applications, the speedy switch-over to digital broadcasting and the global popularity of user-generated content. Citizen journalism is upon us and will likely, in time, change the nature of community journalism. Affordable broadband internet, which is driving the most fundamental shifts in global media patterns, is due to arrive as part of the build-up to 2010. It is a patchy media policy which does not try and anticipate the impact of these developments and encourage strategies to make them serve the ANC’s goal of embedding democracy and promoting media diversity.

Entry Filed under: Anton Harber, Journalism, Media regulation, Print, TV