Journalism can only highlight issues, society must act
Kabo Ramasia | Monday September 8, 2025 15:30
The notion that journalism is failing in its duties, as often peddled on social media discourse, especially by those who seek to criticize the extent to which it can influence change, is sometimes misguided and, if left unchecked, would mislead the gullible. Criticising journalism is allowed and must be encouraged in its entirety if it is constructive and not destructive or meant to undermine its function in a forever-evolving landscape where most may need constant reminders of what journalism stands for. It’s never wrong for any fraternity to be put under a microscopic lens. All that works for good in a democratic society where divergent views matter. It should, in fact, be encouraged. This helps in promoting responsibility among journalists and ensuring that they know that their work is influential enough to make or break a nation. However, the criticism must border on facts and not just wild accusations, which are at times intended to water down journalistic work and stifle free speech. Whilst journalists are not infallible and must know that society judges their work, it is important to note that criticism without facts pointing to shortcomings is always akin to blowing hot air. It’s a wild goose chase.
Even worse, criticism becomes more dangerous when done out of ignorance. Thus, whereas some would be alive to the reality that journalism mirrors society, it may be that when society, with all its moral righteousness, points a finger at journalists for a failed/collapsing state of affairs, it is by extension pointing to itself. Mirror reflections never deceive. They reflect things as they appear. Similarly, mirror reflections are like X-ray scans used to see bones and joints, and sometimes internal organs. X-rays reveal the bone fractures, as they are in the case of injuries. Likewise, this is the same analogy we must bear in the back of our minds when we debate on the role of journalism and whether it has achieved any mandate. Journalism reveals society as is. Could it be about corruption, nepotism, shortage of drugs in public hospitals, the collapsing public education system, or anything that is of interest, it is usually that journalism may frame headlines denoting a certain societal challenge, but it’s usually the responsibility of society to act on any revelations. For instance, local media have for years been reporting about youth unemployment as a time bomb that could explode anytime. Despite the story dominating headlines year-on-year, there is nothing more the scribes can do apart from setting the agenda. To achieve any tangible solution, all stakeholders relevant to any highlighted societal issue must instigate reforms, be it at policy, legislation level, or otherwise. It serves no purpose if the media discloses all the soaring unemployment figures, but those at the helm of steering social transformation choose to look elsewhere. No matter how much a story is given prominence, it is often society that should be at the heart of reforms. A second example would be that of economic challenges, with the government's financial revenues dwindling amidst sluggish diamond markets. The story has been widely published from print, broadcast to digital media platforms.
The story, as it evolves, presents a clarion call for all hands to be on deck for economic diversification. However, the story is not new. It has been repeatedly told in the past. Therefore, should any diversification efforts ensue, they should be on the basis of the agenda set by journalism. Alone, journalism cannot achieve much, as often misconstrued. Further, in talking about corruption and mismanagement of public resources, it goes without saying that as a watchdog, journalism would have sniffed out most of the leads before they could be investigated. How many stories have been told on alleged corrupt politicians and their dealings, and how swiftly have those mandated to investigate corruption followed such leads? How many instances can be recited where the media exposed human rights abuses, injustices, poverty, and social inequalities? Journalism has on many occasions told perspectives of the marginalised in society, including youth, indigenous groups, women, persons living with disabilities, persons living with HIV, and other vulnerable groups? Essentially, journalists are like messengers. They are not judges or prosecutors, and in mirroring society, they must do so fairly without any prejudice. The efforts of journalism in tackling pressing societal issues must be met by a fully responsive society, which understands the importance of acting on such information. For any major investigative story proving to be factual, it must be that society must demand answers.
Currently, the story of the shortage of medication has taken centre stage. But should it be the usual business as usual, where journalism informs and society complains, yet there is no real push for change? It was on this understanding of societal dissatisfaction that, in or around 2010, the Arab Spring occurred. Society had had it up to the back teeth. By the end of the revolution, most of the then Middle East ‘dictators' who had held on to power for decades fell. That is the power of journalism. Think of the Watergate Scandal in the 1970s, which led to the fall of then-US President Richard Nixon. He had been a victim of great journalism and societal pressure. The story forced him to resign from office. Nonetheless, if society becomes consumed with trivia, then it would reflect on the mirror. That said, journalism can only highlight, but society must act! *Kabo Ramasia is a Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA)-Botswana national governing council member. He writes in his personal capacity.