1887

oa Litnet Akademies : 'n Joernaal vir die Geesteswetenskappe, Natuurwetenskappe, Regte en Godsdienswetenskappe - Die media, demokrasie en burgerlike deelname : 'n etiek van luister : geesteswetenskappe

 

Abstract

Suid-Afrika kan as 'n "nuwe demokrasie" beskou word wat in die 1990's tot stand gekom het na baie jare van kolonialisme en apartheid. Die ontstaan van die nuwe demokrasie het saamgeval met ingrypende veranderinge in ander dele van die wêreld. Hierdie beweging word soms die "Derde Golf van Demokrasie" genoem. As deel van hierdie demokratisering het die Suid-Afrikaanse media betekenisvolle veranderinge in eienaarskap en regulering ondergaan, en die media moes hulself heroriënteer ten opsigte van 'n nuwe demokratiese omgewing. Hierdie heroriëntering het gelei tot 'n voortgaande debat oor die mees geskikte normatiewe raamwerk vir die nuwe demokrasie binne 'n Afrika-konteks. Hoewel die etiese kodes waartoe die Suid-Afrikaanse media hulself in die demokratiese era verbind het, ooreenkomste toon met die kodes van die media in gevestigde demokrasieë in Noord-Amerika en Europa, is hierdie norme telkemale gekritiseer deur waarnemers wat wil sien dat die media 'n groter meewerkende rol speel om die nuwe demokratiese regering te ondersteun in sy pogings om ontwikkelingsdoelwitte te behaal, asook deur diegene wat daarop aandring dat die media "Afrika-waardes" moet navolg. Hierdie artikel sal 'n oorsig gee oor hierdie normatiewe spanning en debatte ten einde te illustreer hoe media-etiek in 'n nuwe demokrasie, en binne 'n nie-Westerse kulturele konteks, die onderwerp is van 'n onderhandeling tussen globale norme en plaaslike omstandighede. Nadat hierdie debatte en onderhandelinge geskets is, sal 'n alternatiewe raamwerk voorgestel word, naamlik 'n "etiek van luister", wat demokratiese deelname in die nuwe demokrasie kan ondersteun.


South Africa can be considered a "new democracy" that came into being in the 1990s after many years of colonialism and apartheid. The emergence of this new South African democracy coincided with far-reaching changes in other parts of the world. This movement has been called the "Third Wave of Democracy". As part of this democratisation process the South African media underwent significant changes in ownership and regulation, and had to reorient itself in relation to a new democratic environment. This reorientation led to an ongoing debate about the most appropriate normative framework for the new democracy within an African context. Although the ethical codes to which the South African media committed themselves in the democratic era show similarities to those from media in more established democracies in North America and Europe, these norms have often been criticised by observers wanting to see the media play a more collaborative role to support the democratic government in achieving its developmental goals. There have also been critics that have been of the opinion that the South African media should do more to observe "African values". Although press freedom is entrenched in the democratic Constitution, the self-regulatory system of the press has repeatedly been criticised for not having strong enough sanctions or being biased towards the media. This criticism culminated in a proposal by the ANC for a statutory media tribunal that would have the power to impose fines or even prison sentences on journalists. In reaction to these threats the Press Council embarked on a series of public hearings countrywide in 2011 in an attempt to strengthen its self-regulatory processes (and repair its reputation in the public eye). One of the outcomes of this consultation was a revised press code and constitution for the Press Council. A subsequent investigation by the newly established Press Freedom Commission headed by former judge Pius Langa, whose task it was to scrutinise the effectiveness of the self-regulatory system, recommended that the self-regulatory process be replaced with one of co-regulation, with greater representation from the public.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/litnet/10/2/EJC141447
2013-08-01
2016-12-09
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error