Independent Media’s departure from the PCSA is not a retreat but a victory for press freedom. It is a declaration that they will not be silenced, says the writer.
By Sipho Tshabalala
Independent Media has taken a decisive and courageous step in defence of press freedom by withdrawing from the Press Council of South Africa (PCSA). What began as a complaint over a single article has evolved into a powerful rejection of what Independent Media views as a biased and corrupt institution. The decision to exit the PCSA is not just symbolic; it is a resounding call to defend the right to free speech and challenge the very forces threatening the foundations of democracy.
The controversy started with an opinion piece written by Edmond Phiri titled “Is Karyn Maughan South Africa’s Leni Riefenstahl – the Nazi Film Propagandist?”. It drew the ire of Karyn Maughan, News24, and Media Monitoring Africa (MMA), all of whom lodged complaints with the PCSA. The council’s response was swift and disproportionate, demanding retractions, public apologies, and even the replacement of the article with an official PCSA statement. Independent Media sought to appeal this heavy-handed approach but found itself up against a deeply entrenched bias within the council.
Mohammed Hoosain, CEO of Independent Media, condemned the council’s actions, calling them a blatant display of partiality. "Our defence was ignored," Hoosain said. "The PCSA has shown its true colours—favouring those with influence while silencing those who dare challenge them." This was not about upholding journalistic ethics but rather about enforcing compliance with a narrow, predetermined narrative. Independent Media refused to bow to these pressures, standing firm in their decision not to retract the article, despite the threat of expulsion. As Hoosain put it: "If defending our integrity leads to expulsion, then so be it."
This battle is about much more than a single article. Independent Media’s departure from the PCSA is a stand against the erosion of press freedom in South Africa. What should have been a body defending journalistic integrity has, in their view, become an enforcer of censorship, shielding powerful media houses like News24 from accountability while punishing dissenting voices.
Hoosain’s criticism extended to the MMA, accusing it of wielding undue influence over the PCSA and reshaping editorial standards to suit its agenda. “The PCSA, which claims to be a guardian of press freedom, is now imposing draconian measures on us while other so-called independent outlets continue to publish defamatory content without consequence,” he said. The actions of the council, he argued, are a stark reminder of the censorship that once plagued the country during apartheid.
Hoosain’s reference to apartheid-era censorship is not mere rhetoric. On October 19, 1977—known as Black Wednesday—the apartheid regime silenced dissenting voices, banning newspapers and arresting journalists. Today, we face a new kind of Black Wednesday. The PCSA, acting as a self-appointed “super editor,” orders retractions and deletions, all under the guise of maintaining ethical standards. Yet, these actions mirror the very tactics used by oppressive regimes to control the narrative and stifle opposition.
Independent Media’s accusations are serious: the PCSA has become a de facto censor, using its authority to silence independent journalism and enforce the standards of rival media conglomerates. Hoosain’s words echo with urgency: "This is not just about punitive measures. This is a calculated effort to silence independent voices and force compliance with the standards of our competitors."
The implications are clear—this is not just about Independent Media. This is about every journalist, every media outlet, and every citizen who values the right to speak truth to power. If the PCSA is allowed to continue its course, unchecked, we risk the very pillars of our democracy.
At the core of this battle is the unshakeable principle of free speech. It is the cornerstone of any functioning democracy, and any attempt to curtail it must be met with unwavering resistance. The tactics may have evolved from the days of apartheid, but the underlying goal remains the same: to control the narrative and suppress dissent.
In this fight, Independent Media stands as a vital defender against the creeping forces of censorship. When voices like Themba Sepotokele call for “ethical journalism” while labeling independent media as “rogue,” we should all take notice. There is no such thing as a "rogue" press in a free society. Once we start drawing lines around which voices are acceptable, we open the door to tyranny.
Independent Media’s decision to leave the PCSA is a declaration of true independence. They refuse to be bound by a biased council that no longer serves the public interest but instead serves the powerful. This is not just a fight for Independent Media; it is a fight for the soul of South African journalism.
As we reflect on the lessons of Black Wednesday, we must also recognise the ongoing struggles of today. The battle for press freedom is far from over, and Independent Media’s stand is a reminder that we must remain vigilant. Censorship, whether disguised as ethical oversight or overt suppression, remains a threat to our democracy.
Independent Media’s departure from the PCSA is not a retreat but a victory for press freedom. It is a declaration that they will not be silenced, that they will continue to defend the right of every journalist to report freely. The fight for press freedom is non-negotiable, and it must be defended at all costs.
* Sipho Tshabalala is an independent writer, commentator and analyst.
** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media.