Ever wondered why your daily papers forever seem to displace
a commodious range of front page stories that always seem to have a
contemplative focus on stories that transpire in certain areas in your
societies, with little to no attention given to some? You may be forgiven to
think that maybe the journalists who inscribe in these papers live in one
clustered district, that receives news from either a solitary source, who is
copiously blessed with the capacity to congregate a perfect anthology, or the
stories come readily packaged and merely dispersed at the break of dawn to the
multitude of readers apprehensively waiting; coffee in hand, for the latest
gossip and enthralling occurrences from the day before.
Today I was blessed with a chance to sit in a
discussion on the concept of liberalism and the on-going talks on the
Protection of Information Bill, intimately known as P.O.I.B by many. The
amazing thing about such talks is that they don’t come every day, and when they
do, one has to conventionally sit back and pay undivided attention to whoever
has something to share. Not to be underlined as a principle to be adhered to in
every session where ideas are tossed around the room, but It gives one an
opportunity to draw his or her energy and critical standpoint; aligning all
that is being shared with what they have experienced or heard as a distinct
entity in the world that they exist in.
“We pay lip service into liberalism,” said the
Chairperson in the discussion. From this
stance, as an individual living in the current segment of political bustle,
especially in South Africa; a country still on its knees but gradually rising
from tremors of years of afflicting apartheid days and racial inequity, it automatically
rings a bell. His view point states that we claim to possess a liberal frame of
mind yet in actual fact our deeds still conform to more prejudicial conduct,
and we carelessly conscribe to a more dangerous mindset than the one that
publicly solicits prejudice and discrimination.
His example is on point. He says an individual will
have a housekeeper, or a maid, if you would like to call them, but is this
person treated with the same kind of respect and kindness that we portray to
other people in our circles, that know us a ‘liberal’ thinker. If you dig deeper into it, you might discover
that for the maid, one has perfectly set crockery, cloistered in a cupboard,
far from their highly-priced silverware, that only they and a chosen few can
lay their hands on. Even to relieve themselves (the maids), they need to make
their way to the cottage lavatory, or the bathroom outside, because the one you
use in the house if off-bounds. “Then how liberal are you, if your
noninterventionist mannerism is limited to some and unavailable to the rest of
the world?” he added. This certainly got my attention, and like I said, in
sessions like these you need to be civilly positioned in your seat, and not
move a single muscle.
As he opens the floor to everyone, and different
topics and ideas switch hands, until the issue of the P.O.I.B comes up. Yet
again, I am left with not one or two, but a dozen viewpoints to this matter.
Firstly, as opposed to what many media practitioners have come to believe; that
the P.O.I.B is being put in place to suppress media houses and forge a
formidable breeding space for more execrable government activities, which will
be difficult neither to monitor nor bring to the awareness of the public. He
dismissed this notion, and insists that the P.O.I.B is there for the protection
of the public as a whole. (But how, I asked myself...?)
He brought to the table the issue of how media house
have gone to a great lengths in finding refuge and shield behind a few words
that have come to characterise most of news bulletins we read or hear on radios,
and the words include ‘alleged’ and ‘it is believed’, just to mention a few. He
maintains that most media practitioners are forever drifting into a more
sensationalised style of writing, which has come to be known as tabloids these
days. Good news is somewhat sidelined by what ‘they’ believe will sell the
paper and guarantee its circulation. Death, violent crimes, spiteful scandals
and horrendous stories are plastered on the front page not entirely because
they matter the most, but because as human beings we seem to be drawn to such;
especially when the accompanying images are overflowing with bloodshed and
horrific accidents, with innards splattered all over the place.
Furthermore, he notes how even today societies
continue to boast a huge and significant share of segregation, albeit South
Africa is almost two decades into independence. Sections in the public get more preference
than the other, which then influences the type of news that we get at the end
of the day. “P.O.I.B is there to protect you as a citizen, from the sensationalised
news that media companies would want to sell to you,” he proceeded. “It is
there to eliminate the words ‘alleged’ and ‘it is believed’ from media practitioners’
dictionaries, and dare them to get it right, with accurate and fully-researched
information.”
What all this came to was the aspect of regulation. It
suddenly dawn on me the potency of this feature. Every bureaucracy or
structure, within society, needs to be guided by some form of law, which has to
make sure its interests are in line with those of the populace. This doesn’t mean
journalists and media practitioners now have to bow down to what an apparatus
of government, or an office related to it thereof has to say. It would simply
mean journalists are neither above the law nor are they beneath it.
Apart from not having a lot of mouths willing to share
in this discussion, I kept mine tightly sealed, feeding fluently at all this information
at my
disposal.
My mind is still engaged in a battle of its own, carefully
eliminating all the inconsequential data and shredding it into my wastepaper
basket at the back of my head, for future resurrection if need be, and finely assembling
all the relevant fragments into my depository. It’s definitely a hefty piece of
the info pie, but it remains food for thought nonetheless.
So, right now you would probably have a picture of how
intense and astute the whole discussion was. If I was to try and narrate every
single detail of the session, I would probably devour ten complete pages just
to put it all in. It is up to you as an individual to know what is right or
what is wrong for you. Let’s not journey in oblivion, but let us all be informed
and have information at our fingertips in terms of what transpires in the upper
echelons of our societies. Till next time, be safe....
No comments:
Post a Comment