General Mkhwanazi is upsetting academics.
They’re cross because twice now at the parliamentary ad-hoc committee hearing he’s scoffed at the idea that presenting a granny-disemboweling, ATM-exploding warlord gangster with a restorative justice plea agreement that includes airmiles and timeshare in Margate as incentives for an apology isn’t really his thing. He has other ideas, and this annoys people who believe that the gangster is only sadistic because of lead-based paint, or other climate injustices.
General Mkhwanazi is also upsetting journalists. His appearance on Wednesday prompted SANEF to publish an emergency statement, condemning “in the strongest terms” his comments that journalists who publish sensitive information should be prosecuted.
For journalists (and certain politicians), there is something undeniably troubling about the general: what he’s not saying. As performances in front of committees or inquiries go, it’s difficult to think of a witness with as much unnerving confidence.
He sits and talks, casually at times, occasionally venturing into a philosophical dimension before some calculation, usually with questions he asks himself. That’s just theatrical. He’s answered those already. He knows stuff, and the awkward shuffling and expressions watching him on Wednesday know that he knows stuff too.
Whatever emerges from the General’s view of the media environment – whether it be scrutiny on the culture of access journalism, where reporters buddy up to profiles with the promise to be a gentle lover in return for prominence, or whether a need arises to probe whether some institutions have been captured by certain political interests – it’s clear that that reporter Jeff Wicks has distinguished himself and his renewed commitment to investigative journalism. The Shadow State – which could be repurposed to describe the General’s allegations – is exceptional. It’s more exceptional than anything else that went before it.
Outstanding books
Which is not to say that no others have distinguished themselves. Adriaan Basson, Jacques Pauw and Paul Holden have all authored outstanding books. Basson’s research was impressive in Finish and Klaar, about the corrupt Jackie Selebi, whom the ANC appointed National Police Commissioner despite his having stolen from it previously. Zuma Exposed was equally good; whilst he may not have succeeded in bringing Baba down, his work handicapped the respective agendas of Nomgcobo Jiba and Lawrence Mrwebi – two of Zuma’s most important extensions at the time.
In 2018 there was a lull, and unfortunately, a distinct edge of Ramaphosa praise emerged as an editorial policy from the usual suspects. During this era journalists were talking into the void, then turning to us and claiming the void was complying. It evidently wasn’t: the way that Ramaphosa was separated from a rotten carcass and covered for – at times in isolation – was unacceptable, possibly unforgivable.
But Wicks’s work is an indictment of the Ramaphosa failure, and a welcome return to the approach and execution of the kind of careful examination that should never be afforded a sabbatical again.
Circumstantial shifts caution sympathy. The shifting model of western media was exposed in the emergence of Donald Trump, his first Presidency, his virtual banishment, then his triumphant return. Reporters, like academics, appeared intolerant of non-careerists in leadership: a view which made getting a fair audience impossible for Trump. He responded in kind, and we all know what happened, and continues to happen.
Perverted analysis
The next stage of this perverted analysis – not liking someone for whatever reason, then letting that contaminate objective positions – proved a sly opportunity for American and European media in both moral and commercial expedience. So began this infantile era of social justice commentary, as an editorial position. Nobody asked for it.
South Africa was not immune, and appeared aligned with some motives of the shift: it is important to hype grievance. Unfortunately, most of the grievance – contained in claims that trans people were committing suicide in record numbers as a result of bullying, or institutional or subliminal racism, or that sea levels were rising at dangerous levels – was and remains contentious. The media, buoyed by the disinformation rackets that mysteriously appeared during the era of the shift, started getting impatient with their audiences and scolding them, which you’d think was daft, considering that the vast majority of their commercial models now relied upon digital subscriptions. The net result was i) division, then ii) echo chambers.
Unfortunately for SANEF and those who find themselves upset, there are some examples that may have formed the General’s unflattering views.
The Sunday Times’s vendetta against Johan Booysen. The behaviour of Iqbal Survé. The childishness of doxxing, then trying to claim that doxxing lies in the national interest. Ramaphosa.
And more recently. A day after his death, the late Tshidi Madia of Eyewitness News (EWN) posted a photo of herself in an embrace with DD Mabuza, along with the emoji of a broken heart. In May Madia had been swamped with admiration for her defiant remarks against Donald Trump’s claims about South Africa. She even appeared on CNN. But lamenting one alleged tyrant whilst scorching another isn’t convincing behaviour: something her colleague, former SABC anchor Sophie Mokoena, is also accused of.
Bewildered public
What is apparent to the innocent if bewildered public is that the General’s position and Wicks’s expression of thorough journalism have much more in common than in opposition. This is not a useless appointee or a cadre talking. This is not someone who looks to things like droughts to explain rhino poaching. Similarly, Wicks’s reporting is exactly the sort that a country must demand of its media.
Combined, these two forces are providing an indirect glimpse into hell: something that hasn’t happened before. The time for outrage will emerge, and there’ll be plenty to keep everyone occupied, but first the tree must continue to be shaken, even if it makes the media uncomfortable.
The views of the writer are not necessarily the views of the Daily Friend or the IRR.
If you like what you have just read, support the Daily Friend