Independent Media further criticised the Press Council for its handling of opinion pieces. File picture: Werner Beukes / Independent Newspapers Archives
Independent Media has issued a scathing rebuke of the Press Council of South Africa, contending that the media watchdog has abandoned its role as a protector of press freedom and instead is acting as a censorship body.
The media company claims the Council's recent ruling, which demands the removal of an opinion piece by Edmond Phiri published in the Sunday Independent, is a clear infringement on media freedom and an affront to democracy.
The ruling has sparked a fierce response from Independent Media, who says that the decision is riddled with bias and inconsistencies. The company has vowed not to comply with the order, arguing that it violates the fundamental principles of freedom of expression.
“Independent Media firmly rejects the recent ruling by the Press Council of South Africa that demands the removal of an opinion piece written by Edmond Phiri, a member of the public, published in the Sunday Independent,” the statement reads.
“This decision, which is riddled with bias and clear inconsistencies, represents a severe infringement on media freedom and the right to free expression.”
The media house is preparing a comprehensive response to the Press Council, as well as a detailed report from Phiri himself, who has conducted research into Karyn Maughan, the journalist who complained.
According to Independent Media, Phiri’s findings “irrefutably demonstrate” Maughan’s bias in her reporting on Independent Media, Sekunjalo, and Dr. Iqbal Survé.
Meanwhile, Independent Media’s Editor-in-Chief, Adri Senekal de Wet, has lodged a formal complaint against Pieter du Toit, Assistant Editor of Investigations at News24, accusing him of fostering a biased narrative and bullying during the hearings.
The company contends that the Press Council has selectively enforced its standards, allowing biased perspectives to flourish while silencing alternative voices.
Independent Media further criticised the Press Council for its handling of opinion pieces, citing the differing treatment of Phiri’s work in contrast to Marianne Thamm’s controversial comparison of Julius Malema to Hitler and Mussolini, which was published in Daily Maverick without repercussions.
The statement also raised concerns about Media Monitoring Africa (MMA), which was admitted to the proceedings. Independent Media argues that the organisation is not an independent entity, but is funded by wealthy business interests and influenced by foreign agendas.
The media company questioned the integrity of the Press Council’s reliance on MMA’s submission, which they describe as ‘biased and unfounded.’
“To Independent Media, it is abundantly clear that the Press Council has transformed into a propaganda arm of News24, working to suppress any narrative that deviates from the mainstream,” the statement asserts.
“This ruling is part of a concerted campaign to prevent the majority of South Africans from hearing alternative views and voices that challenge the status quo.”
Independent Media has categorically refused to abide by the Press Council’s ruling, citing material inaccuracies and a perceived overreach of its mandate. The company reiterated its commitment to providing a platform for diverse opinions and robust debate, pledging to continue resisting any attempts to silence dissenting voices.
IOL has reached out to the Press Council for comment and will update the story when it becomes available.
IOL