Debates about the role of public officials in engaging with the media are not new, yet they continue to reveal tensions about the meaning of accountability in democratic societies. One such debate arose recently when one colleague suggested that ministers appearing in studios or granting interviews to the media are, in fact, doing journalists a favour. At first glance, such arguments might seem persuasive, especially if one reduces the media to a private industry that seeks content. However, a closer reading of democratic theory, constitutional obligations, and national development frameworks demonstrates that such a view is both narrow and misleading. Under Section 12, the Constitution of Botswana guarantees freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions, receive ideas and information, as well as to communicate such ideas and information without interference, among other things. While the Constitution does not explicitly compel ministers to sit in studios, its emphasis on the right of citizens to “receive ideas and information” implies a duty on the part of those who hold public office to ensure that such information is accessible. Public officials, particularly those entrusted with executive authority, cannot meaningfully uphold this constitutional right if they remain silent or retreat into private communication channels. By engaging with the media, they operationalise the constitutional promise of free expression and access to information. Such an obligation is also reflected in Botswana’s long-term vision. Under the pillar of Governance, Peace and Security, Vision 2036 makes it clear that: “By 2036, Botswana will be a country where governance is open, transparent, and accountable.
The rule of law will be entrenched, human rights will be promoted and protected and there will be zero tolerance for corruption.” This statement is not merely aspirational. It lays down the principles by which State actors must conduct themselves. Ministers who grant interviews on radio or television are, therefore, not merely speaking to journalists. They are aligning their actions with national aspirations of accountable governance and an informed citizenry. Such constitutional and developmental framing aligns with the Social Responsibility Theory of the media, which emphasises that the press is not simply a commercial enterprise but a societal institution tasked with ensuring that citizens have the information necessary to participate in governance. Journalists, therefore, do not ask questions for their own amusement. They act as intermediaries for citizens who cannot all be in the same room with a minister. As one editor once observed, “When we interview a Cabinet minister, the people are in the room with us.” From this perspective, media engagement is not a favour extended to reporters but an obligation owed to the public in fulfilment of both constitutional principles and national development priorities. In Botswana, this responsibility has historically found expression in the central role played by Radio Botswana. Since independence, RB1 has been the platform through which the government communicated policies and reassured the nation in times of uncertainty. The President’s speeches, broadcast nationwide, offer not just information but a direct link between the presidency and ordinary citizens scattered across villages and towns. To this day, radio remains the most accessible medium, trusted across age groups and communities.
