OCTOBER 19, 1994
Seventeen years ago, on October 19 1977, the apartheid regime made one of its most draconian moves: it took drastic action, cracking down on its political opponents in the most heavy-handed fashion.
Activists were detained, organisations were banned, journalists were locked up and newspapers were closed down. That day was dubbed "Black Wednesday" as our country, and the world, recoiled in horror at the high-handed action of a government under intense pressure.
Today could also be called "Black Wednesday" - but ths time, friends, the "black" would only refer to the colour of our skins, rather than to our dark intentions - because we have no dark intentions. We in government have to desire to detain political opponents, to ban organisations, to hang or to send journalists to jail or to close down newspapers, TV and radio stations.
How can we, when we've fought so long for freedom of speech, freedom of expression and the democratisation of the communications industry? Why, our very own constitution states categorically in Chapter 3: Every person shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, which shall include freedom of the press and other media, and the freedom of artistic creativity and scientific research."
We realise fully well that a democratic society must be an informed society. And, as you know, our Reconstruction & Development Programme persistently calls for the rapid movement towards a democratic information order in our country. Again, I quote: "Open debate and transparency in government and society are crucial elements of reconstruction and development. This requires an information policy which guarantees the active exchange of information and opinion among all members of society."
And here's the punchline: "Without the free flow of accurate and comprehensive information, the RDP will lack the mass input necessary for its success."
Friends, some of you may believe that we are merely paying lip-service to these remarks - you may think the constitution and the RDP are just pieces of paper. Some of you have felt the sting of our tongues in recent months, yet we also felt the sharpness of some of your pens. You may feel cynical about seeing us standing here today and espousing press freedom as we do from time to time.
Let me make the following absolutely clear: To me, to us the constitution is sacred. It is the one document which was fought for, lives sacrificed and consequently must be defended as a matter of life and death. It is the cornerstone of our society - But if needs be we will use all the means at our disposal to defend our constitution's integrity.
I have said it before, and I will say it again: some of the criticisms laid before us in our first 100 days in office were justified and we welcome that, so do we, the right of reply. Yes, we may have sent shivers in the spines of some of you. We accept that.
In our view society with all its elements is constantly changing. South African society is changing rapidly. The media must capture and address itself to these state of affairs which is aimed at providing better quality of life for all our people, entrenching political stability, the reduction of crime levels, especially socio-economic related crime, and of course serious crimes largely unrelated to adverse socio-economic conditions and the creation of a healthy economic climate for both domestic and foreign investment.
All these have the cumulative effect of enhancing economic growth which is critical at this transitional stage of our political, social economic development. Consequently economic growth enhances job creation and brings into the market more and more people to share in the production of goods and services and as consumers of these vitals. The media has an obligation to clearly define its role in this regard.
Without listeners, viewers and readers media is devoid of all meaning. Readers, listeners and viewers are not to be regarded as a passive group of robots or morons sheepishly ever-ready to swallow every word of any journalist or editor. No credible journalist would welcome this kind of response.
Naturally, from our side we welcome being caricatured, cartooned, lampooned or even being lambasted-we welcome even the cynical but not cynicism -which is the philosophy of being perpetually cynical, where nothing works, where everything is viewed in the negative at all times!
Let us as well, rectify an incorrect perception that suggests that the business of media is only or largely related to being critical of government only. Media should reflect fairly on the entire society within which government is but one component-albeit a major component. in the context the media has to be critical of business, the church, of crime, -of all crime including white collar and pinstriped crime, which is the most damaging to our economy.
Media must criticise sports, culture and all aspects of life. But here comes the critical rider: the media must be seen to be critical of itself! When last did we hear or read one editor criticising another, one journalist another, one newspaper another? Are we to conclude from this that there is silent sort of secret agreement to regard one another as holy-cows? When shall we hear media self-criticism?
A free press, all media, must come to terms with a responsive but not sheepish listener-reader and viewership. One that is sometimes intellectually aggressive in response to what is read, heard or seen in the media. When some of the stuff thrown around by the media comes back-there should not be a need to yell foul! foul! Cowboys don't cry!
I believe there will always be - there must be - a critical balance of tension not for tension sake- between the government and the media- in such a healthy tension-filled situation, we are all duty-bound to keep a close eye on each other. But we must see them in context; as Connie Molusi, president of the South African Union of Journalists, stated this week; "The recent 'outbursts' by government officials do not pose a major threat to press freedom... they are (merely) the result of tensions inherent in the economic and social power distortions that derive from the inequalities created by our aparthied past."
I have a special message for you today, Press Freedom Day 1994. My message is: Let's move beyond a war of words between the media and ourselves. Let's take the process forward - Let's work, together, to develop a better understanding of the relationship between government and the media.
Let us address the shortcomings of not debating this issue before. We should have sat down with media practioners - at all levels - to discuss how you see things. We owe you the opportunity to state, without being interrupted, exactly how you see the role of the media and how you see relationships between government and the mass media.
For this reason, we are happy to announce today - symbolically, on Press Freedom Day - that we would like jointly with you, the media workers and media owners of South Africa, the opportunity to help us develop a better understanding of this relationship.
We're going to do this in the form of a public hearing (not an inquision but an informal sessions), hosted by my office, to be held in the near future, at which all interested parties will be able to make representations on the following topic: "The relationship betwen government and the media in 1994 and beyond".
I'd like to encourage you to make representations to that hearing.
How do you see government's role in democratising the South African information order?; what do you understand by "press freedom" and "freedom of expression"?; how do you see the rights and responsibilities of journalists and media owners?; how does the ownership of media institutions affect what is published? Is it true that he/she who pays the pied piper plays the tune?
There are other burning questions, too: How can we ensure that South Africans have greater access to the media? How can we ensure the survival of our vibrant, vital and alternative independent media - magazines such as Learn & Teach, for example, which are currently threatened with closure?
How do we encourage the growth of community media voices? What should the media magnates - the people who own M-Net, for example - be doing to encourage grassroots expression? And what role should government be playing - hands-on, or hands-off?
The public hearing will be an open day to journalists' unions, newspaper bosses, radio station owners, even the head of the SABC.
We will take all your ideas and opinions, debate them within our own provincial government and try to feed them into a "position paper" which outlines our attitude towards the media. Our position paper will, in addition, be made available to the national task group which is currently developing a Freedom of Information Act for our country.
Staff in my office are currently working on the finer details of our provincial public hearing; we will be issuing a specific invitation, and guidelines for presentations, in a few days' time.
I look forward to hearing your views. And I look forward, in particular, to the development of a critical and robust media which services the needs of all citizens in our province.
Let us conclude, on this anniversary of Black Wednesday by paying special tribute to gallant media fighters who made a sterling contribution to the process of democracy in our country to ensure that freedom of expression is enshrined as a democratic principle in our country.
Because of their efforts, in the midst of the millions of South Africans who clamoured for the right of expression and democracy ... today we have an interim democratic constitution.
We also want to extend word of gratitude to the various media unions who for years fought side by side with us to ensure the reign of freedom of expression. In this context we also welcome the newly formed Black Editors Forum.
Issued by: PWV Premier Tokyo Sexwale Sowetan Press Freedom Day Johannesburg Garden Court Holiday Inn 19 October 1994