CMP Critical Reflection

by Tessa Trafford and Prinesha Naidoo (Television)

The notion of ‘public journalism’ as outlined by Haas is personally problematic. In our initial deliberation and outlining of what we, as journalists putting Haas’ theory into real-world practice, wanted to achieve through the practice of public journalism, we feel that we were overly-theoretical and did not take into account the various difficulties that would be faced further into the course.

As journalist we had a ‘grand narrative’ in our minds that seemed perfectly accomplishable at the time that we were deciding on our stories and how we were going to implement ‘public journalism’. As a larger group we held a public meeting in an attempt to get the citizens to aid us in setting a news agenda. This meeting allowed the citizens in ward 8 to raise their concerns and gave us a chance to gain a deeper understanding of the community. However, we feel that here we should add that going into the meeting we, as journalists, already had an agenda. We had discovered that one of the issues in the community was a lack of recreational facilities for children and so we were hoping that this issue would be raised in the public meeting. Luckily it was, and so as a larger group we chose to focus on this problem as it was something that we felt we would be able to help in some way and so give back to the community in which we were working rather than just finding stories and then leaving.

After holding the public meeting we decided that our focus, as a larger group, would be the youth in ward 7 and 8 and our overarching theme would be ‘emptiness’. We also walked around the community several times, talking to various people in an attempt to find out as much as possible about the history of the wards and the various problems in the area. Although we feel that this is some way addressed the notion of what exactly public journalism is and how one would go about putting it into practice, we still feel Haas’ approach is too theoretical and while he cites various examples there is no concrete approach in his writings on how to best put into practice the concept of public journalism. We feel that while we as journalists have come to appreciate the difficulties in researching and producing good work, we are still unsure about what we have left behind in the community, if anything. With this in mind it is difficult to conclusively say whether anything was lost or gained from this experience.

We produced a television piece which centred on ward 8 being built on a former graveyard. The angle that we chose to take was how any attempts at building infrastructure in the community was halted because of the discovery of human remains. This story was particularly pertinent because the area has a rich history dating back to the Battle of Egazini and work was halted because an archaeologist had to be called in to determine the historical significance of the remains. This story was also of interest because culturally, building on the graves of the ancestors is viewed as disrespectful. After showing our piece to our multi-specialisation group we were asked to focus more on the youth angle that had been decided on earlier in the project. In this regard we are going to attempt to speak to younger members of the community and compare their feelings about the ancestors, the history of the ward and how they feel about the lack of infrastructure to an elderly couple who spoke to us about their concerns regarding the above.

Our piece has changed dramatically from when we first set out to shoot it. We started with the concept of looking at how the ward had once been active (in terms of recreation activities) and how this had died out. We, as a larger group, had planned a soccer day and it was to be this day that would form the basis of our follow-up story. However after interviewing Mr and Mrs Mbonde, who have lived in ward 8 for over 40 years, it became clear that our connector (where we originally got the story idea from) had not given us the entire story regarding recreational activities in the ward.

After interviewing the Mbonde’s it became clear that it was more pressing to focus on the human remains found and because of the discovery of these remains the halting of building projects. According to the information that we got the building was stopped in 2007 and has resumed. However, after holding a mini-focus group, we found out that building has resumed although we can find no physical evidence of it. We used various sources for this project-from a DA councillor, to residents of the community to a white sangoma who is also an anthropologist. We feel that we used a wide variety of sources which had added to our production of public journalism in the way that it gives many different people a voice. Our piece could also be said to conform to the notion of public journalism in they way that we as journalists decided on the story and with us focusing on the human remains and housing situation we are reflected a larger community’s concern.

As journalists, we feel that we went into this project a bit blind. We did not go in with a specific idea of what we should be producing and how this would fit into the idea of public journalism. We feel that while we attempted to go into this project with a clearly defined journalistic approach, we were not completely successful in defining our journalistic approach. One of the major issues that we found with this piece is that although the story was chosen differently, once we knew what the story was we went about producing it in a very similar way to how we have produced other pieces during the year. This is problematic for us as professionalising journalists as we were not sure if we were taking the wrong approach or if it was because Haas does not give a clear indication of how to turn theory into practice.

As far as our own identities as journalists have been impacted on in this course we feel that producing this piece has opened our eyes to the multiplicity and complexity of the problems faced not only in ward 8, not only in Grahamtown but in South Africa a s a whole. The frustration that we have experienced trying to contact various officials and the helplessness we felt at times were all, in retrospect, a critical component of this course. We feel that as journalists we have broadened our understanding of the issues in Grahamstown, the politics of local government and we have, in some miniscule way, managed to share in the daily frustration felt by those living in ward 7 and 8. As far as our identities as journalists go both of us have conclusively reached the understanding that there is no such thing as objectivity, yet it is rather difficult to articulate clearly at this point exactly how it has influenced our identities as journalists.

When we first decided to pursue the aforementioned story, it seemed simple. Luvuyo Location in Fingo, Ward 8 had been neglected as it was once used a grave site and so all attempts to upgrade its existing infrastructure were halted due to the discovery of human remains. Following the break in the 2007 construction of RDP houses and flushing toilets after the discovery of human remains and their subsequent removal to a communal grave site construction has yet resume. Through our story, we aimed to find out why construction has yet to resume and how this affects residents of the aforementioned area by showcasing certain aspects of their daily lives.

However, upon further investigation and after conducting focus groups with the Makana Municipality, Anthropologist and Sangoma Penny Bernard, and local Democratic Alliance Councillor Micheal Whisson, we found that, for several reasons, construction in the area has been stopped indefinitely. Firstly, the rightful ownership of the area is a contentious issue as people who believe that the land was forcibly removed from their families during apartheid, have laid claim to it. Another reason as why the construction was stopped is because the area is of historical importance, as it is believed that the remains of those who fought in the battle of Egazini are buried there, which meant that SAHRA had to send archaeologists to excavate and identify the remains. The involvement of a governmental organisation, with its own particular procedures and protocols, in addition to the Makana Municipality and a construction company slowed down hindered any progress.

After speaking with residents, we found that they themselves are largely unaware of the aforementioned issues and as such we decided to include this information in our piece as we are well aware that since we as a group don’t have the means necessary to put enough pressure on the parties concerned to resume construction, we could at least provide the residents with the “full” story. From our understanding the relevant parties and construction process in caught up in protocol, an issue covered in our story in the form of a complaint raised by residents who say that Municipality Officials promise to take up their complaints in town but never get back to them – people are too busy trying to follow the correct procedures and referring issues to a host of different people to actually listen to the citizens complaints. In this regard, we now plan to listen to exactly what worries those living in the area and to tailor our story so that it addresses their concerns. We think that the citizens will be able to better engage with the content we produce if it addresses their questions and that they will best be able to champion their own cause if well informed. This will also enable us to encourage the residents to engage in joint problem-solving and hopefully put pressure on the only institutions can help them, namely SAHRA and the Makana Municipality.

Our focus groups themselves were not characterised by community based problem solving as we sought to get official comment from key actors. The focus group planned with the Makana Municipality did not go as hoped due to a misunderstanding, on their part, of the reason for the meeting. The fact that the Municipality Manager was not willing to speak with us, student journalists from Rhodes University, an institution with considerable weight in the area, unless we went through the proper channels to set up a meeting made realise just how hard it must be for the residents of Luvuyo Location to have their voices heard. This along with the fact that journalists and their investigations were labelled “suspicious” during the meeting made us whether two important tenets of democracy, namely government accountability and freedom of the press, are largely theoretical concepts. The fact that this focus group did not go as hoped, proved detrimental to our piece – the very nature of our story meant that only the municipality could respond to the questions that we need answered. This means that the municipality has considerable editorial influence over us and our story; we are still hopeful of meeting with them and as such have decided to put the footage obtained during the failed focus group on the back burner.

The focus group held, with Bernard and Whisson was more fruitful. While suggestions as to how the residents may tackle the problem emerged both Bernard and Whisson do not live in the community concerned. This is another area in which Haas’ theory pertaining to citizen-based joint problem-solving falls flat, as we are unsure as to whether only those vexed by the problem at hand can engage in the deliberative and problem-solving processes. Judging by Bernard and Whisson’s reaction to our piece as well as the questions raised and answers provided after the viewing, our documentary which mostly followed hard news conventions in addition to personal anecdotes, was effective in gaining audience attention.

In terms of our story, Christian’s collaborative role of the media, whereby, a symbiotic relationship exists between the state and the press, holds merit. Residents of Luvuyo Location, especially those who settled there 40 years ago when the area was a designated transit camp, don’t understand their predicament due to a lack of information pertaining to official Municipality comment and notification. While the media should be more far removed from the state, it is also important that they fulfil their roles as public informants and so the collaborative role is valid in South Africa, especially as the public are often accused by the state of being ill-informed on matters about which they protest. In addition, other CMP groups past and present, have also complained about a lack of information and correspondence between the municipality, the media and the public.

Nevertheless, some autonomy between the state and media is necessary as the media also have an obligation to the public to fulfil a radical watch-dog role and inform them of any wrongdoings on the part of the state. In a sense, public journalism is similar to radical alternative journalism in that both forms of journalism aim to expose failure on the part of the state. Public Journalism is however, driven by ordinary citizens, whereas radical alternative journalism is carried out by those with considerable institutional backing. Radical alternative journalism is also useful both in terms of this course and in the South African context as the failed focus group with the Makana Municipality and much publicised furore surrounding the media tribunal brings the issue of government accountability to fore.