Ruling by the Deputy Press Ombud
November 8, 2016
This ruling is based on the written submissions of Malebogo Mashishi and News24’s Ahmed Areff.
Mashishi, in his personal capacity, is complaining about the article “Zuma repeats mistaken refugee claim” published online by News24 on September 20, 2016 (http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/zuma-repeats-mistaken-refugee-claim-20160920)
Complaint
Mashishi complains that the headline and the introduction to the story falsely implied that President Jacob Zuma had misled the United Nations by repeating the number of asylum seekers in the world, while in fact he had referred to the number of asylum seekers in sub-Saharan Africa.
Text:
The story, written by Carien du Plessis, follows President Zuma’s address to the United Nations Summit for Refugees and Migrants and says: “President Jacob Zuma has repeated the erroneous claim that South Africa is the biggest recipient of asylum seekers.”
At issue is one sentence that was initially not used in full which says: “Over time, sub-Saharan Africa has hosted and continues to host a vast number of forcibly displaced persons with South Africa being the largest single recipient of asylum seekers.”
The Arguments
Mashishi says the journalist implies that Zuma misled the UN and then uses UNHCR report that places South Africa as only the 10th-largest recipient of asylum seeks. However, Mashishi contends that Zuma was making reference to South Africa being the highest recipient of asylum seekers in sub-Saharan Africa and not the world. “As a result of this act, the reported story is not truthful, accurate or fair,” says Mashishi.
In its response, News24 says that in the sentence quoted and in the context, President Zuma did not make it clear whether he was comparing South Africa to the rest of South or to the rest of the world. News24 said the emphasis on “largest single recipient of asylum seekers” made it appear that he was singling out South Africa compared to the rest of the world.
News24 said it originally wrote the story with only the latter part of the sentence but later changed the story to include the whole sentence for context with the following note: “This story has been corrected to incorporate elements of Zuma's speech that were not scripted, as the original report was written off his prepared speech. The sentence about South Africa being the largest recipient of asylum seekers was initially ambiguous, and the full sentence was added for clarity.”
It added that Africa Check often pointed out that politicians repeat the false claim that South Africa was host to the largest number of asylum seekers in the world “so it was not unreasonable to have inferred that the president was repeating this claim”.
News24 says the president’s initial statement was open to ambiguities. It submitted that the complainant has not standing to complain about the correct or incorrect interpretation of the statements made by the President and asked that the complaint be dismissed.
Analysis
The Press Code is clear: Section 1.1 notes that the media should take care to report news truthfully, accurately and fairly; Section 1.2 adds that news should be presented in context and in a balanced manner without any intentional or negligent departure from the facts whether by distortion, exaggeration or misinterpretation, material omissions or summarisation.
Article 1.9 states that where a news item is published on the basis of limited information, this shall be stated as such and the reports should be supplemented once new information becomes available. Although new information came to light to give greater content to the story, this information was not incorporated into all elements of the story.
The question is not whether the President complained or not but whether the story is accurate, far, balanced and in context. Complaints to the Press Council are not restricted to those directly affected by the content of the story and the complainant can therefore submit a complaint.
News24 recognised that the full sentence gave essential context that corrected the original story (which implies that a part of the sentence, which was also used, lacked that context). Indeed, Africa Check - cited as the trigger for the original angle - also Tweeted a correction on the matter.
The fact that News24 published the full sentence and the noted correction indicates that the initial interpretation was skewed. Despite this correction, News24 maintained the headline “Zuma repeats mistaken refugee claim” and the introductory paragraph. Even though the story was corrected, the headline was unchanged and therefore did not reflect the corrected contents of the story.
Findings:
News24 breached Sections 1.1 and 1.2. of the Press Code with the original story and headline. These state:
1.1. The media shall take care to report news truthfully, accurately and fairly.
1.2. News shall be presented in context and in a balanced manner, without any intentional or negligent departure from the facts whether by distortion, exaggeration or misrepresentation, material omissions, or summarisation.
10.1. Headlines and captions to pictures shall give a reasonable reflection of the contents of the report or picture in question.
Seriousness of breaches
Under the headline Hierarchy of sanctions, Section 8 of the Complaints Procedures distinguishes between minor breaches (Tier 1), serious breaches (Tier 2) and serious misconduct (Tier 3).
The breaches of the Code of Ethics and Conduct as indicated above are a Tier 2 offence.
Sanction
News24 needs to place an apology and correction with the current story that fully reflects the changes to the story. Specifically, it should correct the headline and introductory paragraph so that it reflects the content of the story. It must therefore amend the correction the end of the story to reflect these changes.
In drafting an apology, the following should be noted:
The text should:
• start with the sanction (apology);
• refer to the complaint that was lodged with this office;
• end with the sentence, “Visit www.presscouncil.org.za for the full finding”; and
• be approved by the Deputy Ombud.
The headline should reflect the content of the text. A heading such as Matter of Fact, or something similar, is not acceptable.
Appeal
Our Complaints Procedures lay down that within seven working days of receipt of this decision, either party may apply for leave to appeal to the Chairperson of the SA Press Appeals Panel, Judge Bernard Ngoepe, fully setting out the grounds of appeal. He can be contacted at Khanyim@ombudsman.org.za.
Paula Fray
Deputy Press Ombud