Posts Tagged ‘democracy’

What is a citizen?

david holwerk

By Annetjie van Wynegaard

Date Released: Sat, 31 August

david holwerk

This week David Holwerk, director of communications at the Charles F. Kettering Foundation in Ohio, USA, was visiting the School of Journalism and Media Studies to talk about how journalists write about citizens. The Kettering Foundation is a research organisation in the USA with a strong interest in work done by citizens, communities and journalists in a democracy.

Holwerk said that it seems to be a universal article of faith among journalists that they serve the needs of citizens in democracy. But journalists seem much less certain about what citizens actually do, which raises doubts about the ability of journalists to serve citizens’ needs effectively. “Why do people need things?” asked Holwerk. When you need something, he said, it implies that you want to do something. “If need implies action, then what is it that citizens do? They vote. We give them the information they need to vote. Why? Are citizens only voters?”

These are the questions Holwerk has been grappling with for the past four years. At the Kettering Foundation many political scientists and theorists have some ideas about what citizens do. So Holwerk started to think, “You ought to be able to figure out what citizens do by looking at what journalists do.” But when you look at newspapers, watch television or listen to the radio, it’s difficult to find citizens there doing anything, he said.

Journalists and editors need to develop a broader, denser, more robust understanding of what it is that citizens do, he said, but the conversation seems completely theoretical in the context of American journalism.

Enter the Eastern Cape. Holwerk said the Eastern Cape in particular is a rich place to pursue these questions about citizens and journalists that are current and real here. Holwerk said the conversations he has had with journalists from the Daily Dispatch and the Herald he could have had with few American journalists. He said because citizenship and democracy are still fairly new in South Africa, it gives these kinds of questions currency. He found in some South African newspapers community dialogues that bring citizens together to wrestle with issues and solutions.

What is a citizen?

Holwerk said an obstacle to journalists everywhere is not having a clear definition of the word. The legal definition of citizen is someone who is entitled to full rights, including voting rights, in their native state, he said, but this is both too broad and too narrow for the purpose of journalism. Another definition is anyone with the ability to act, he said, but if merely having the ability to act makes you a citizen and you choose not to act, there is no need for journalists to act, and nothing to cover.

Holwerk’s definition of citizens is two people working together to solve a shared public problem. For journalists, if two people work together to solve a private problem, it’s not news, but if they find a solution that benefits the public, that is news.

This was not Holwerk’s first visit to South Africa. Last year he moderated a panel on journalism and citizenship at the National Arts Festival, and in 2011 he was a speaker at the symposium on Ethical Reporting of Health Issues in Africa. In 2008 Marietjie Oelofsen, a PhD Fellow in the Mellon Media and Citizenship Project at the Department of Journalism and Media Studies, went to the Kettering Foundation in Dayton, Ohio as a Fanning Fellow in Democracy and Media. At that time Holwerk was the editor of the Sacramento Bee and the foundation sent Oelofsen to Sacramento to speak to him about journalism and his work around citizenship. Holwerk joined the Foundation as director of communications and resident scholar in June 2009. Oelofsen went for another meeting and they started to talk about Holwerk visiting South African newsrooms and journalism schools.

Before coming to the Kettering Foundation, Holwerk worked for more than 30 years as a journalist at newspapers in Kentucky, Minnesota and California. He worked as a copy editor, reporter, editorial page editor, managing editor and editor-in-chief. He has managed staffs that have won numerous national awards, including two Pulitzer Prizes for editorial writing.

Holwerk is a graduate of the University of Kentucky. He spends his spare time fishing, writing country music and perfecting his recipes for barbecued chicken and hot sauce.

Photograph by Annetjie van Wynegaard

The roads we travel

coverage

When I was invited to attend a debate, I thought it would be a quick trip to Johannesburg. It has turned out to be a long journey. Although the traveling itself  took only 24 hours, I have learnt a lot about myself and about the people that share the roads we travel on in South Africa, and so the trip was about more than traveling over 1000kms across South Africa, it was about listening, sharing, debating and discussing.

It started last week with an invitation to The Mail & Guardian’s Critical Thinking Forum which was to debate ‘The Role of South Africa’s Youth in the National Development Plan’. By Monday this week it was confirmed that I would attend and by Wednesday morning the journey began in earnest – starting with a shuttle from Grahamstown to Port Elizabeth. On the drive I was fortunate to have a very friendly, intelligent South African driver, and we chatted about many things. The conversation started with talk about Nelson’s Mandela’s continued stay in hospital, and then swiftly moved onto his impressions of the bumpy road that South Africa currently finds itself on. He lamented about the fact that things had not changed significantly since the end of Apartheid, and commented that many people he had spoken to said that things had in fact gotten worse. While there are many aspects of the lives of ordinary people that have improved significantly, the media sometimes point to particular sectors which have deteriorated since the transition to democracy. The Economist, for example, recently published a story where it reported that Mamphela Ramphele had argued that education is currently worse than during Apartheid (http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21580151-ruling-party-triumphed-under-nelson-mandela-desperate-need).  Business Day quoted Desmond Tutu as saying that violence is worse now than during apartheid (http://www.bdlive.co.za/national/2013/04/12/sa-more-violent-now-than-under-apartheid-says-tutu). While these are subjective positions, they clearly point to some of the potholes that we are currently experiencing as South African citizens on the road to a grown-up democracy.

The flight to Johannesburg was uneventful and I quickly made my way to Rosebank where the event was being held. The debate itself included some of the 200 Young South Africans, recently profiled in the Mail & Guardian (http://mg.co.za/report/200-young-south-africans), and was targeted very much at a young, professional, elite audience who were there to debate and discuss how to get more young people (those who are not the targets of the event) to engage with the National Development Plan (NDP – http://www.info.gov.za/issues/national-development-plan/).

The first panel comprised of Matsi Modise (National executive director of the South African Black Entrepreneurs Forum), Lise Kuhle (Founder of Eco Smart), Godfrey Phetla (Director for policy and research at the Department of Trade and Industry), Angel Kgokolo (President of the JCI South Africa), and Langalethu Manquele (from BMF). This panel was tasked with discussing the NPA itself, and while this was interesting, it centered largely around enterprise development and whether this was the best option for addressing unemployment amongst the youth as proposed by the NDP. The questions that constantly came to mind for me were: Do young people know about the NDP? How do they find out about opportunities for internships, starting their own businesses, and mentorships? How much of the knowledge being shared in the room by these panelists is in the public sphere and being debated in the media in a way that is accessible and relevant to young people? Is the NDP the right vehicle for change, and are young people drivers,  passengers, or bystanders desperately trying to catch a lift?

The second panel comprised of Mike Sharman (owner of Retroviral Digital Communications), Khanyisile Magubane (SAfm broadcaster), Catherine Peter (Africa Director of One Young World), and Patrick Mashanda (Regional coordinator of Ikamva Youth). This panel looked specifically at the role of the media in addressing social cohesion – the focus of much of the work I do. The panel members said many interesting, inspirational, but somewhat idealistic things in their very short openings. The really interesting comments, however, started once the debate opened to the floor and as participants we were able to contribute. Many people complained about the largely negative reporting in the media, and the phrase “if it bleeds, it leads” was quoted numerous times, guests questioned the popularity of tabloid newspapers, and the media was generally charged with poor driving and failing to obey the rules of the normative road a democracy follows – i.e. being the watchdog, holding the government to account, and giving citizens a voice to debate in the public sphere.

And this is the crux of where the mainstream news media is failing. I qualify the media here, because I think a problem with the debate was that ‘the media’ was treated as a homogenous entity that needed to be put into place, but is in fact a multi-faceted institution in South African society that varies so greatly that we need to be quite careful in how we use the term. In my view, the biggest role (and there are many) that the mainstream news media can play in engaging with young people on the NDP (or any issue for that matter) is to allow young people VOICE in their coverage of issues that affect young people. These are the very issues that we have been doing research on in the Mellon Media and Citizenship Project, and we have learnt a lot about young people over the last year and a half. The issues which are the most important to young people currently are the economy, service delivery, health, education, and crime. The young people that we spoke to in our study said that they were most concerned about crime (93.4%), the economy (90.7%), and health (89.3%). The problem is that these are not the issues that are being covered for young people in the mainstream news media they consume.

                                                     

More worryingly, is that even in coverage on issues which do affect young people, the stories do not speak to young people, and they certainly do not give voice to young people. In research I conducted which examined coverage by a range of newspapers around the country (Daily Dispatch, Grocott’s Mail, and Mail & Guardian), coverage on education included young people as sources or quoted young people in only 9.7% of the stories. More often stories quoted or gave voice to adults in management positions at schools or universities, government officials, or members of the public. This, in part, is why tabloid newspapers should not be laughed at or regarded disparagingly, and it is why they are so popular – they give voice to ordinary South Africans who are telling their stories (regardless of how bizarre they are).

If the media want to include young people on the road to building a strong democracy, they need to invite them on the journey rather than ignore them as bystanders. If the young, upwardly mobile South Africans who attended the debate are any indication of where the born frees can get to and how they can do it, then the young people of today are a force as strong as those who drove the revolution in 1976.

And so, having shared the work that we’ve done, and having listened to young people with something to say, I made my way back to the Eastern Cape. Another uneventful flight, and another interesting conversation with the shuttle driver. We came to the conclusion that there is a long road ahead for South African’s, but that the scenery is worth the effort. As we made our way through the rolling hills of the Eastern Cape, I wondered how many young South Africans would be making their own journeys of discovery and where the road would lead them.

Is South Africa a home for all?

By Azwihangwisi Mufamadi

In commemoration of the human rights week, Rhodes University hosted a panel discussion to debate whether South Africa was a home for all.

Professor Barney Pityana, well-known human rights activist and Rector of the College of Transfiguration, chaired the discussions. He said that the South African constitution stresses the importance of social cohesion as one of the fundamental ideals. “The values that are set out in the constitution are tested by the way we relate to one another,” Barney Pityana.

Professor Francis Nyamnjoh, a social anthropologist at the University of Cape Town, pointed out that home and belonging are concepts that are constantly given meaning by the social process that human beings engage in. Belonging depends on one’s experience with a particular environment. “Legally I have a French passport but I don’t feel French at all” he said. “I don’t have South African residence or passport but I feel that I relate to people in ways that make me feel that this is home for me for the time being.”

Xenophobia was an underlying theme that ran throughout this panel discussion. Drawing on her research work with Congolese migrants in South Africa, Dr Joy Owen of the Rhodes University Anthropology Department said that the experience of migrants in South Africa is not always a positive one. “They are recipients of xenophobic attitudes and violence in the hands of the state and its citizens,” she said.
Owen also pointed out that relationships across nationalities are often forged but they are not easy to maintain because they “are constructed within a general environment that is hostile and alienating”.
Despite all these challenges relationships do exist between international men and South African women. “There are stories of friendship and love across divides. On a micro level South Africans are forging relationships with continental Africans every day,” she said.

Bishop Paul Verryn of the Central Methodist Church in Johannesburg said that South Africans need to remember that the reason they are a non-discriminatory nation is so that the injustices of Apartheid never happen again. Verryn, whose church provides refuge for many Zimbabwean migrants, encouraged people to be more tolerant to other nationalities.
“Opening of our homes and our borders to Zimbabweans does not come without its difficulties,” he said. “Integration does not happen to human beings by the process of osmosis”.

Professor Pedro Tabensky, a Rhodes University philosopher, pointed out that the only solution is to bridge the inequality gap that divides South Africa and to embrace humanity. “What is required is to see humanity in the other; the foreigner, the neighbour, the worker and the entrepreneur,” he said.

Dr Sizwe Mabizela, Rhodes University’s Deputy Vice-Chancellor of Academic and Student Affairs, said that South Africa will only be a home for all when we begin to see ourselves as part of humanity rather than in isolation.

Login Form

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in D:\iis\mediaandcitizenship\wp-content\plugins\gantry\core\gantrygzipper.class.php on line 153