Ruling by the Press Ombudsman
5 March 2016
This ruling is based on the written submissions of Ms Sarit Tomlinson, on behalf of TV presenter Pearl Thusi, and those of Nonzwakazi Cekete, editor of Move! magazine.
Complaint
Thusi is complaining about an article in Move! of 3 February 2016, headlined It’s over between Robert and Pearl – The pair have broken up amid rumours of cheating, reports Zenoysi John.
She complains that the article, which was about her (alleged) break-up with her boyfriend Robert Marawa, was false as the couple never broke up.
The text
The article said that Metro FM and Supersport host Robert Marawa had allegedly broken up with Thusi after “apparently” having discovered that she had had cheated on him. The cheating was alleged to have taken place during a week-long Tropika Island of Treasure cruise to the Portuguese Islands off Mozambique last year.
John wrote that, according to sources, SA’s Got Talent and Vuzu presenter Lalla Hirayama had witnessed Thusi and her former boyfriend (Chris Nkosi) “sharing a passionate kiss in a toilet while on the cruise”.
The magazine’s response
Cekete says a source informed John about the issue, and the journalist decided to verify the information with two other sources. She says the reporter then contacted Hirayama, who “blatantly” denied the allegation. John followed this up with a call to Thusi, who responded that the whole matter had to be a joke.
The editor concludes, “We did everything beyond reasonable doubt to verify the story.”
Analysis
This is the situation: Hirayama was said to be the original source – but she denied that the allegation came from her, or that it was true; Thusi also vehemently refuted the rumour.
This means that the:
· only “sources” on whom the magazine based its article on, were secondary (or tertiary) ones; and
· information was (therefore) not credible enough to even be published as an allegation.
The issue is simple: Move! magazine should have refrained from publishing the article in light of the total absence of any credible verification.
I have said this so many times before: A magazine is not allowed to publish an allegation just because someone has made it, as there has to be some form of validity to it to back it up – without which reporting can easily become inaccurate and unfair, and unnecessarily damaging to the subject in question.
Even if it is found at a later stage that Thusi and Marawa have broken up, the magazine still was not justified to publish the allegation in question at the time it did.
Finding
The article is in breach of Section 1.1 of the Press Code that states, “The media shall take care to report news truthfully, accurately and fairly”.
Seriousness of breaches
Under the headline Hierarchy of sanctions, Section 8 of our Complaints Procedures distinguishes between minor breaches (Tier 1), serious breaches (Tier 2) and serious misconduct (Tier 3).
The breach of the Press Code as indicated above is a Tier 2 offence.
Sanction
The magazine is severely reprimanded for publishing the allegation, even as an allegation, and directed to apologise to Thusi, on top of the same page where the article was carried, for inaccurately and unfairly publishing that allegation, and for the unnecessary damage this has caused her.
The text, which should be approved by me, should:
The headline should reflect the content of the text. A heading such as Matter of Fact, or something similar, is not acceptable.
If the article appeared on its website, the apology should be published there as well.
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.
Johan Retief
Press Ombudsman