Maile's attack on journalist is totally unacceptable. We need more complex thinking.

Last week Lebogang Maile, the Gauteng MEC for Housing, launched a tirade against a News24 journalist for asking perfectly legitimate questions. Not only did he use the f-word repeatedly, he also accused the journalist of being racist. There are ample opportunities in our country to legitimately accuse people of racism and I will be the first one to call it out when I see or hear it, but it seems to me that this is increasingly becoming an all too convenient (and lazy) way of politicians to vent their anger against journalists who are asking difficult questions of them.

It is also a blatantly obvious attempt to intimidate them. 

This is of course not the first time something like this has happened. A few years ago, the late Jessie Duarte lost her cool during an ANC press conference and accused Samkele Maseko of being “arrogant”, “behaving like the lord of the media”, and always “asking attacking questions”.

When he was still president of the ANC Youth League, Julius Malema famously ranted against a BBC journalist and chased him out of a press conference. In 2018 he accused Rajeni Munusamy of being part of an Indian cabal, and in 2019 published the late Karima Brown’s phone number on Twitter. Both suffered horrendous harassment afterwards. Recently, Jacob Zuma took it to new heights with his ongoing court actions against Karyn Maughan. 

The DA, although more circumspect, also attacks journalist and opinion writers. After writing an opinion piece about John Steenhuisen’s chances of becoming president of South Africa (based on polling numbers), he launched a nasty personal attack against me on his Facebook page. Renaldo Gouws, the DA councilor in Mandela Bay, recently made a TikTok video telling me to “Shut up”. (Just as an aside: I was amused that he started by saying no one cares what I write, yet he clearly cares enough to take the time to make a TikTok video about it.)

These are only a few of many examples. 

Ironically political parties are the first to complain if they feel sidelined by the media, because without the press they have no profile and are forced to spend a fortune on advertising space.

Yet, it seems that politicians frequently forget that they do not get to dictate what journalists must and must not write about them.

It is important to remember that journalists are bound by the rules of the press code and can always be sued, but ultimately it is their job to ask the difficult questions, as well as investigate and write the stories the politicians would like to hide.

This obligation is the cornerstone of any democracy.

Just imagine where we would have been without the brave journalists of amaBhungane?  For one, the Guptas and their cronies would most probably still have been running the country! So, no matter how irritated they feel, politicians don’t have the right to attack journalists for bravely doing their jobs. 

Equally so, opinion writers must air views even if they are not popular. I have been writing a weekly opinion piece for many years. I try to be honest, sincere and balanced in my writing. I am fully aware that not everyone agrees with me and I welcome that. I’m interested in what people say and think, and believe strongly that it would be a boring and dangerous world if we all agree.

 The problem is that many people want their opinions to be confirmed and become aggressive and angry when confronted with different views. Almost every week, I face a torrent of abuse and even threats by readers who don’t like what I write – many who (like the politicians) want me to “shut up”.   

Many of those prefer to see individuals or actions as either good or bad. In the chess game of life and opinions, they choose to play on either the white or the black squares and when their views are affirmed by me or other writers, they feel good and validated. However, when they are challenged, they feel uncertain and angry and lash out. 

This is unacceptable. 

It is essential for our views to be challenged, not only for our personal development, but also to ensure tolerance, peace, and stability in the world.

We must be able to accept that things are often more complex than simply good or bad and that we mostly have to play on grey squares.

This requires of us to hold a certain tension and to accommodate what might seem like opposites. For example, it is totally possible and most possibly true that both the City of Cape Town and the taxi associations had valid points and behaved incorrectly during the recent taxi strike. It is also totally possible and almost certainly true that there is both good and bad in the ANC, DA, EFF and all other political parties. It might feel easier and perhaps even safer to blame one party in a dispute or for writing off political parties as all bad, but apart from being untrue, it only makes us as intolerant as those that we are angry at. 

Our world is complex and requires complex thinking, which is challenging and hard work. This does not mean that we must let go of good values, but let’s put tolerance, kindness and good manners at the top of the list, whether we are politicians or “ordinary” citizens.