The journalists in South Africa must be exposed if they are corrupt and I support the ANCYL on this one

There has been a lot of fanfare about the ANCYL spokesperson's dossier which seeks to reveal all the journalists' shenanigans. Although I don't condone such tactics but I do also believe that it is a necessary evil. I am not a fan of the ANCYL nor its spokesperson nor its president either. I don't believe in the law of the jungle since it states that you live by a philosophy of, "kill or be killed". As a God fearing Christian but not an indoctrinated one, I don't believe that if one slaps you, you must turn the other cheek either.

For this reason I declare that it is entirely justifiable for the ANCYL to fight fire with fire after all they find themselves in the jungle infested with monsters called journalists. Let me hasten to add that I don't hold anything against journalists and instead I believe that they too are a necessary evil. I firmly believe too that one needs to keep or maintain a cordial relationship with the media. But I ask, what do you do when they show you a thick middle finger and try to score cheap points at your expense?

I have worked with some journalists before and I still do - incidentally I also grew up with some of them. I thus hold no vendetta nor do I resent them but I condemn the way they conduct themselves at times. For this reason, I honestly do not see anything wrong in what Mr. Shivambu has done. Equally, I do not see anything wrong when journalists sincerely expose corruption or when they reveal the abuse of powers to benefit individuals instead of the public they serve either.

Where I have a problem though is when these journalists pry into other people's lives and invade their privacy under the guise that it is the public's right to know (or it is in the public interest to expose such) whereas they are actually driven by ulterior motives. At no point or no-where in our constitution does it state that, "by virtue of having taken government or political office, you therefore automatically lose the protection of a right to privacy."

So where therefore do our journalists, commentators and analysts get this crazy idea that politicians do not have a right to privacy? Some or most journalists are usually at pains to convince us (the public) to believe that our leaders, particularly the ANC's have no scruples or morals. In the process they project themselves as a voice of reason and one that has the public's interest at heart. This however couldn't be further from the truth because those of us who have investigative researching prowess know very well that the only real interest these journalists have is their back pockets and those of their employers.

You see, when I was in high school many years ago, I was an editor of the Maths Society. My teacher once asked me to write an essay whose topic was: Are newspapers recreational facilities. This seemed odd at the time given that our business was to talk about Mathematics. So I wondered as to what was expected of me but it all came together once I had started the investigation.

At a tender age of 17 or so years I went about researching this topic and I couldn't believe the information I uncovered out of that assignment. I have since then, although it is many, many years later, written numerous articles about the media. The judiciary didn't escape my criticism either and this included laying accusations on both institutions that some of them take bribes which is fact - pity that I can't prove it though. But Mr Shivambu, instead of being applauded, is being vilified and made a villain. This bad habit is the cancer which has eroded the morals in both these institutions which are critical in a democratic society.

This sentiment is especially true in a not so young democracy anymore like ours because we rely on both to strengthen our democratic principles/ideals. So then why are people like Mr Eusebius McKaiser so worried about being exposed or the media being exposed? If the dossier contains the shenanigans that the holier than thou Dumisane Lubisi and his supposedly morally upright journalists/colleagues have been up to, shouldn't Floyd tell the public?

Surely the public deserves to know and I will assert that such a story newsworthy. This will arm the public so that the next time around a tainted journalist writes an article or story or scoop, sensible people will be able to see through them. One must think carefully before believing the contents of articles written in South Africa because at times opinion is presented as fact without the reader being told about it.

It is of or in the public interest for society to know that these people (i.e. journos and their editors) who always feed them with (at times false stories) are also corrupt. The expose` is not necessarily about getting even but it is done because the public has a right to know. As we would say in Zulu, "usifumbu ubona uqhaqhazela" in most cases where journalists are concerned. This idiom simply translates to mean that, "those who live in glass houses should not throw stones".

If you are tainted, it doesn't preclude you from exposing others but you must know that when your own shenanigans are uncovered, you will have to face the consequences of having rubbed some people the wrong way. At times as the public we are hoodwinked into believing false stories which are made front page news but when they retract such a story it is slotted somewhere at the back where hardly anyone notices it.

Unfortunately such poorly researched stories destroy other people's lives. It thus gives the aggrieved people every right to defend themselves with whatever means necessary against their persecutors within the law of course. Our journalists forever claim to fight corruption and we are constantly told that the ANC leaders are corrupt yet it has now emerged with documentary proof that they (i.e. journos) too are corrupt. I pray that Mr Shivambu will eventually hand over this information to the authorities so that the perpetrators can be brought to book.

In my life I have taken on many powerful and dangerous people but at all times I was prepared to die (and I still am by the way) or I was ready to be sabotaged but I still upheld the ideals I believed in. I have had my fair share of being sabotaged and even attempts on my life after the Polokwane conference but not once did I cry foul. This is because I am a man who was taught that, "indoda ayikhali" which in English means "tigers don't cry". Why then, does Mr Eusebius McKaiser take exception (see here) or have the cheek to call a fellow human being a thug without evidence that such a person is indeed a thug?

Or does he do so because he can and has freedom to express his views no matter how twisted these may be? If this latter view holds true then he is probably not worth the energy to argue against his article. But it still worries me as to why does he find fault when others express their views in whichever way they know how. It seems that Mr. McKaiser has abrogated to himself a right to be the only person who has an opinion.

It also worries me that whenever an ANC politician reveals sensitive information, an assumption is automatically made that the state institutions have been abused to gain such information whereas the same question is not asked of others who reveal stuff about the ANC. This is a wrong premise or mentality though Mr. McKaiser, for you are definitely not the only person who has an opinion and neither are you the only one who has access to information without intelligence links.

This incident reminds me of a time when our president Dr JG Zuma's fabricated corruption case was dropped. My memory is also fresh of a time when he launched several defamation suits against media house. There was an outcry from the Fourth Estate, and it was as if Dr Zuma did not have a right to seek compensation for having endured 9 years of torment at the hands of the biased media which at most times got it wrong anyway. One gets the impression that the media thinks that they are the Gods of this earth or that it is their birthright to expose the corrupt people in SA.

I have news for them though, they are not instead they are just as human as we all are and they are equally just as fallible as we all are. It seems that now that the media fraternity is/are being given a taste of their own medicine, they are crying foul. The Constitution is very clear in terms of the provision for freedom of speech (or expression if you wish). There is no special section which gives the press more freedom of expression than the general public or politicians.

So why then are these journalists and their defenders crying foul or is it because one of their own is being implicated in criminal activities? It is a known fact that journalists in this country take bribes and some even do unprintable things in order to get the stories they run. I challenge anyone who disagrees with this notion to prove me wrong especially those who call Mr. Floyd Shivambu a thug to give me a logical explanation but not the cobs wallop/diatribe that was spewed by Mr. McKaiser though.

I will be waiting to be obliged with less emotion but more wisdom!!!

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter