I wrote this in 2010 as I was bothered by what I observed then: The relationship between journalists and organizational spokespersons is a very interesting one. It is normally a love-hate relationship that regularly swings from one emotional spectrum to another. It is influenced by a number of things that include the personalities involved and the nature and interest that govern their respective jobs. It is true that organizational communication like that of government and the media are two independent institutions but having one audience.
The media has a huge following in the community because many people read newspapers, still more people listen to radio and watch Television.
Both organizational spokespersons and journalists want the community to consume the information that they dish out. As it can be expected these messages can be conflicting at times. This relates to the differing mandates of these communicating institutions. Government communication is driven by the need to inform the community and give them information that will help in their own development. On the other hand the media is driven by commercial pressures. Those in the print media are more concerned about the number of copies that they must sell. It is in this context that possible sensationalisation arises. The media then covers stories that they think will attract customers for that particular newspaper, radio or television. Spokespersons would rather see stories that promote their organizations whether they are newsworthy or not.
I have served on both sides of this relationship. I have written about certain organizations for different publications. In this capacity I had to deal with spokespeople of these organizations and sometimes came across arrogance of people who believe that you are there to serve them and their institutions. I have been questioned for writing a story that people believe should not be written.
I have also served as a spokesperson of certain organizations and dealt with journalists who did stories on my employers.
I was once shocked as I was taking my son to school one morning as I saw my face in one tabloid’s front page. I rushed to pick up the paper to see what was being said about me only to find out that there was more than one photo of me. Only a line in the story referred to me and it only said “the municipality’s spokesperson Luvuyo Zantsi confirmed that……..”. Many people who saw the story called around worrying about what misdeed I have committed. It was worse for those who do not have much understanding of Afrikaans as they made up stories about me committing fraud and about to be fired. I have also dealt with journalist who I felt were seriously biased for whatever reason.
I however still respect the right of journalists to do their work. It is for this reason that I find it distasteful when the ANC Youth leagues spokesperson, Floyd Shivambu, threatened journalists. It is said that Shivambu approached several journalists with a "dossier" on City Press journalist Dumisane Lubisi, which he claims came into the youth league's possession anonymously. He subsequently threatened reporters who questioned the accuracy of the information. He told them that they were “next" for refusing to run the story.
I expected everyone to condemn Floyd because we need a free media. The fact that we suspect media practitioners of less than honorable intentions in carrying out their work is not a good-enough reason for threatening them. We need a media that reports without fear or favour. This is because many organizations, including government, start responding to issues when they are in the public domain. Journalists are the ones who bring these to the fore and they should not be threatened for doing their work. The ANC Youth league should censor Floyd and assure the nation that its future leaders will respect media freedom. I am in no way saying that journalists are angels but I am convinced that they do far more good than bad. We need them to be independent and commentate on our society. Whatever power our political leaders think they have they must not deny us the vigilance of the media. There is no way that all journalists meet and plan to be negative towards a particular group of people. Let us expose misdeeds without threatening the voice of those who speak for the voiceless.
Comments
Post a Comment