The chair of Swaziland’s main press freedom group MISA is
wrong to defend a Swazi newspaper columnist who wrote that battered women who
leave their husbands are ‘bitches’ and ‘most’ women who are beaten up by men
bring it upon themselves.
Alec Lushaba, of the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA)
– Swaziland chapter, wrote, ‘As freedom of expression activists we must defend
the right of an individual to express his view.’
Writing in his personal capacity on his Facebook page, Lushaba
said, ‘We need to defend every individual’s right to express himself, even when
we are opposed to his/her view.’
He added, ‘No voice should be silenced.’
That, coming from Lushaba is pretty rich. Until recently
he was the editor of the Weekend Observer,
a newspaper in effect owned by King Mswati III, who is sub-Saharan Africa’s
last absolute monarch. Lushaba never practiced what he now preaches. He never
allowed a single word of criticism of the king into the paper, although there
were many people ready to voice an opinion.
Now, Lushaba wants ‘freedom of expression’ for Qalakaliboli
Dlamini, the Sunday Times columnist
who wrote that women abuse men more than the other way around.
Dlamini also wrote, ‘In fact, when a woman is battered,
she may have caused more internal damage to the male who will have caused her
external harm. Let us be honest with each other, women are the biggest abusers
in the world.’
The problem with this is that none of what Dlamini wrote
above was true. Or put another way: He was telling lies. There is no evidence to
support Dlamini’s argument, yet Lushaba reckons Dlamini should be allowed to
say it anyway.
Lushaba, and others who have supported Dlamini, need to
recognise that there is a difference between having an opinion and expressing a
prejudice. An ‘opinion’ should be a reasoned argument based on provable facts.
A ‘prejudice’ is a point of view that has no basis in fact.
Dlamini voiced his own prejudice and in doing so deliberately
misled Times Sunday readers.
Journalists are expected by their readers to tell them
the truth. A certain trust needs to be established between newspapers and
readers, so readers can feel that they are not being manipulated. This is
especially important in Swaziland where, as Lushaba himself demonstrated while
editor of the Weekend Observer, ordinary
people are denied access to information.
Dlamini is a serial offender in this. In May 2012 he was suspended
from the Times Sunday after he wrote
an article saying he was proudly homophobic and hated homosexuals. He based – what was in effect a rant – on a report that he claimed showed that
homosexuality was on the increase in Swaziland. No report actually stated such:
it was made up by Dlamini as an excuse for him to vent his prejudice against
gays.
People responding to Lushaba on his own Facebook page have
pointed out to him that Dlamini was inciting hatred and advocating violence
against women in his article.
One person responded to Lushaba saying, ‘But there have
always been limits on freedom of speech and the incitement of crime and hate
speech are two of them. Mr Dlamini’s article clearly crosses these lines and
the editorial team at the Times
should have appreciated this. His article is not a thought piece or provocative
– it’s just a badly written piece of emotionally immature, sexist meanderings.’
Another post said, ‘His use of the Bible to justify
gender-based violence can easily be seen as incitement to assault. (As well as
theologically ignorant and poorly researched). To say women are the worst
abusers when it is typically less than seven percent of gender-based violence
cases are against women flies in the face of academic research and truth.
‘As for support for David Simelane [the murderer of 32
women recently sentenced to hang] on the flimsy assertion that apparently he
was once wrongly accused of rape, it is as bizarre as it is extreme.
It went on, ‘The argument is that it is not the job of a
national newspaper to give a platform for unchallenged, unbridled, factually
inaccurate, biased hatred. There are standards that the public expects when it
buys a newspaper. We expect truth, decency and a well put together argument. Mr
Dlamini’s article fails these tests and it is not censorship to prevent it
appearing but good editorial practice.’
See also
MISA CHAIR BACKS MISOGYNIST WRITER
MISOGYNIST ‘TIMES’ WRITER UNDER ATTACK
CALLS FOR SACKING OF MISOGYNIST WRITER
No comments:
Post a Comment