'Moupo axes own political groomsmen'

| Friday July 25, 2008 00:00

These standards stipulate as follows regarding media practitioners,
1. They must take reasonable steps to ensure that they disseminate accurate and balanced information, and that their comments upon vents are genuine and honest
2. They must never publish information that they know to be false or maliciously make unfounded allegations about others that are intended to harm their reputation.

The Code of Ethics goes further on the question of accuracy and states;
1. When compiling reports, media practitioners must check their facts properly, and the editors and publishers of newspapers and other media must take proper care not to publish inaccurate material. Before a media institution publishes a report, the reporter and the editor must ensure that all reasonable steps have been taken to check its accuracy. The facts should not be distorted by reporting them out of the context in which they occurred.
2. Special care must be taken to check stories that may cause harm to individuals, organizations or the public interest. Before publishing a story of alleged wrongdoing, all reasonable steps must be taken to ascertain and include the response from the individual or organization.

We can go on and on to cite other provisions of the Code of Discipline to show that this article did not conform to media ethics. Our position is that on the basis of the allegations that are being raised in the article, which are not true and malicious, we should have been afforded the opportunity to respond.

It is not true that all those suspended were mentioned in the presidential address. The writer gleefully swallowed what his/her sources said without question. The reporter further alleges that the resolution that said Moupo should carry on until 2010, according to his sources are not true. He fails to verify this with the party, breaching what is the cornerstone of principled journalism.

The article said, 'Of the four commissions that discussed Moupo's continued presidency, three resolved against, though the Gaborone South Central Commission submissions were thrown out by the top desk.' This does not reflect what took place at the Conference.

No commission discussed the issue of Moupo's continued stay. There were four commissions and they discussed the Presidential address, secretary general's report, treasurer's report, campaign strategies, Zimbabwe issue, Swaziland issue and the Media Practitioners' Bill. Also there was also never a commission called Gaborone South Central commission. Each topic was discussed exclusively by each commission. So the statement above is completely inaccurate.

It is also not true that the conference delegates 'also rejected moves by the leadership to sideline Nehemiah Modubule and his PUSO party'. In fact the Conference resolved that action, in the form of expulsions be meted out against those who derail the organisation.

What we have realised is that there are some individuals within the party who have decided to misinform the nation through the papers about the happenings at the BNF.

This has been happening since the Molepolole Congress. They are doing this because they are fully aware that there are certain sections of the media which are gullible and do not care to balance their stories before they go to print. It does not matter to them how much damage these stories do the individuals and the organisations affected. Which is regrettably unfair! Papers are now being used to settle political scores. What they fail to achieve within the party structures, they pursue through the newspapers. 

Gatekeepers in this country should appreciate that they have a huge responsibility to make sure that the dignity of those that are written about in their papers is not unduly tampered with. They also have to protect the integrity of the media industry. Papers should not be used as a platform through which wild, malicious, denigrating and untrue allegations are churned out to innocent readers, who believe that papers are there to educate and inform them without fear or favour.

We as a nation, together with the papers have to jealously guard against excesses that may arise out of lack of adherence to professional and ethical journalism. If we fail, then the enemies of democratic liberties and press freedom will find an excuse to suppress the flourishing of this noble profession. With bills like the Media Practitioners Bill, it is clear that hawks are almost ready to pounce. They will pounce if we continue to fail to adhere to the ethics of journalism.

However we at the BNF are opposed to any efforts that are aimed at muzzling press freedom.

Yours,
Moeti Mohwasa
Information and Publicity Secretary  (BNF)