I prom ised
at the end of my post headed RIDICULOUS ADVERTISING STANDARDS AUTHORITY (Ridiculous) that I would tell you whether or not the ASA’s close ally the Print & Digital Media SA (PDMSA) is
just as ridiculous.
Well it turns out it is.
So the ASA is in equally bad com pany.
The PDMSA too pretends that it sticks to various impressive principles
but when it com es to dealing with
one of it own that clearly has a very warped idea of morality, it won’t take
any action.
It claims to represent more than 700
newspaper and magazine titles. Its members groups are Times Media, Caxton &
CTP, Independent Newspapers, Media 24, Mail & Guardian – all the big boys in
the South African industry – and the Association of Independent Publishers.
So you would expect it to set a shining
example.
Its website talks about its com mitment
to prom ote high standards and integrity, but put to the test this
turns out to be hogwash.
After my com plaints
to the ASA about the unbelievable adverts
in The Citizen newspaper (Unbelievable ads) were dismissed out
of hand even though the ASA had
ruled against similar ads in the past, Leo
Grobler, its Manager, Dispute Resolutions,
continued the ridiculous trend by suggesting I should contact
the PDMSA.
The ASA he
said, did not have the power to stop newspapers carrying this sort of ad, but
the PDMSA would
have som e
say over the business practices of publications.
The Citizen belongs to the Caxton & CTP Group, so you would think it would abide by what the
PDMSA stands for.
In an email to Hoosain
Karjieker, the President of the PDMSA I asked if his organisation had the power to take action
against its members that do not maintain its standards. I told him I was asking
this because a
paper that belongs to one of your members
carries advertisements offering miraculous remedies
and the like that are so outlandish that even the editor of the paper agrees
the ads are not believable. But it doesn’t stop the paper carrying lots of them
on a daily basis, while on its editorial side under a Code of Conduct heading
it tells readers it is ‘com mitted to report news truthfully in accordance
with the highest standards of journalism.’
Karjieker replied that he had given this to the Chief Executive
(Ingrid Louw) who has been dealing with a few of these issues of late and would
revert back to me. He still passed
the buck even further by telling me that there is indeed the Advertising
Standards Authority that has a process where com plaints
of this nature can be laid.
In a subsequent email I told Karjieker I wanted his com ments
for a post I was writing about my unsuccessful attempt to get the ASA to consider my com plaints about The
Citizen’s ads. I pointed out that The
Citizen was owned by Caxton,
which is a member of the PDMSA, and
that his association claimed to be com mitted to prom oting highs standards
and to internationally recognised good governance practices
I submitted that what The Citizen was doing com plied with neither of these ideals.
Ingrid Louw the PDMSA
CEO then explained why they would do nothing to stop these ads. She said
the PDMSA supported two industry
mechanisms to standardise
and regulate issues that are editorial in
nature. These were the Press
Council that has a Press Code
that is guided
by public interest and
deals with reporting, the conduct of journalists and com plaints. The other one was the ASA that dealt with advertising in the print media, amongst others.
The PDMSA and its members
subscribe to both codes,
she went on.
Then she too joined the ASA’s realm of the ridiculous.
She explained that her organisation had no say over
the content of newspapers and magazines as this was covered by the two bodies
she had already mentioned.
It is critical, she said, that as media owners we are not seen to be infringing on editorial independence as these
decisions on what content to included and or not to include is taken by the
editors.
That’s an image that is constantly being perpetuated
by newspapers and their owners when there is no question of owners allowing
editors a com pletely free rein. In
most cases the owners set the standards by which editors must abide even to the
extent of which political party a paper must support.
She wandered further into the ridiculous by
telling me, There
are also other constitutional considerations that must be taken into account. For example the Constitution
provides for freedom of expression
which also includes freedom of com mercial speech. This could possibly be further
explored with the assistance of a constitutional expert.
She added that there were many layers to this discussion and she followed her President in passing the buck once again by suggesting that a discussion
be held with the South African Editors Forum
who could address it as a strategic industry imperative.
What were clearly unbelievable adverts from people masquerading as doctors, professors and
the like had now becom e a strategic industry
matter that nobody in the industry was prepared to make a judgement on.
YOU CAN’T GET MUCH
MORE RIDICULOUS THAN THAT.
My email to Louw said, Your reply is the copout that I expected. In my experience most newspaper editors make out
that advertising has nothing to do with them. The PDMSA is a joke if it claims
to have various high ideals but it won’t get its members to stick to them. What
sort of morality is that?
But that’s what newspapers do. They are a
dismal failure at practising what they preach. And when you suggest that
carrying dubious ads in a paper should be protected under the Constitution’s
provision for freedom of speech you are going into the same dubious area as the ads
themselves.
What you have told
me is made even more ironic by the fact that your President is also the CEO of
the Mail &Guardian, a paper that has made a considerable name for itself
for exposing the wrong doings of others.
The PDMSA’s
hypocrisy is such that while it refuses to do anything about those ads it
continues its proud association
with awards that are in keeping with our com mitment to prom oting
high standards and integrity within the print and digital media.
These include the Nat Nakasa Award, presented by the PDMSA, the SA National Editors Forum
and the Niemen Society.
The judges look for:
·
Integrity and fearlessness (both characteristics of the Dearjon - letter).
·
Tenaciousness in the face of insurmountable obstacles
(another Dearjon
- letter attribute).
·
Courage in making information available to
the people of South Africa (what the Dearjon - letter is doing when
nobody else will).
That’s the Media for you. It has set up these self regulating
bodies which it hides behind to give it an air of respectability.
So don’t expect
it to do anything about advertisements that con, poor unsophisticated readers,
when these are worth a tidy sum to the paper concerned, in this case The Citizen.
Regards,
Jon,
The Poor Man’s Press Ombudsman and Consumer Watchdog.
Buy my book "Where have all the children gone"on Amazon.com
Buy my book "Where have all the children gone"on Amazon.com
No comments:
Post a Comment