For many South Africans, the Daily Maverick has become a platform that serves international and elite interests rather than meeting the needs of ordinary citizens, says the writer.
By Sipho Tshabalala
As Branko Brkic steps down from his role as editor-in-chief of the Daily Maverick after 15 years at the helm, the question that looms over his tenure is simple: has the publication remained a credible news outlet, or has it devolved into a propaganda machine with hidden political motives? This question isn't just rhetorical; it's a critical inquiry into the very heart of the Daily Maverick's mission and the political strings that may be pulling it behind the scenes.
One of the most damning accusations comes from Solly Mapaila, General Secretary of the South African Communist Party. According to Mapaila, the Daily Maverick has been receiving funding from the U.S. State Department via the U.S. consulate in Cape Town. This allegation, chilling in its implications, has not been directly refuted by the publication. The silence speaks volumes. What kind of editorial independence can a media outlet have when its financial lifeblood may be coming from foreign governments?
But the US is not the only source of funding raising eyebrows. The Daily Maverick openly acknowledges financial support from George Soros's Open Society Foundation, ABSA Bank, the Millennium Trust, and other neoliberal institutions. It's no stretch to ask: how can a publication maintain its objectivity when it is reliant on money from these powerful players? When your funders are the same entities shaping global political and economic agendas, the line between journalism and propaganda begins to blur.
A telling moment came in June 2023, when the Daily Maverick's Brkic attended a conference in Gdańsk, Poland, hosted by the European Solidarity Centre and the Brenthurst Foundation. The conference, titled "Rolling Back Authoritarianism," was framed as a pro-democracy initiative, but it's hard to ignore the fact that the event was heavily funded by the Oppenheimer family, who have a deep financial stake in maintaining the status quo. Brkic's presence alongside South African politicians like John Steenhuisen, Roelf Meyer, and IFP leader Velenkosini Hlabisa, who also signed the event's Gdańsk Declaration, signals more than just journalistic curiosity. It suggests that the Daily Maverick is part of a broader political project—one that is designed to push a specific narrative about democracy, but one that aligns with the interests of its wealthy patrons.
Greg Mills and Ray Hartley, both tied to the Brenthurst Foundation and regular contributors to the Daily Maverick, further underscore this connection. The Brenthurst Foundation, established by the Oppenheimer family, is known for promoting neoliberal economic policies across Africa. With such strong ties between the Foundation and the publication, how can anyone truly believe that the Daily Maverick is an independent voice? The evidence points to it being more of a mouthpiece for the Oppenheimer family's agenda than a platform for unbiased journalism.
"The Gathering", the Daily Maverick's flagship event, is another clear indication of the publication's ideological alignment. Year after year, this event features a parade of voices who are predominantly neoliberal, with a few token alternative viewpoints thrown in for the sake of appearances. Looking at the attendees, one would think that this event is in Europe not in Africa—a chilling reminder of the extent to which foreign and elite interests dictate the narratives we consume in South Africa.
The "Opinionistas" section of the Daily Maverick, filled with contributors who parrot neoliberal talking points, further exposes the ideological slant of the publication. While opinion pieces are a legitimate part of journalism, the overwhelming bias in favour of certain economic and political views cannot be ignored. This section has become less of a forum for open debate and more of an echo chamber for those aligned with the publication's neoliberal backers.
Then there's Jonathan Shapiro, better known as Zapiro, whose political cartoons are a regular feature of the Daily Maverick. While Zapiro's work is often lauded for its sharp satire, there's a growing sense that his cartoons serve as a smokescreen, distracting from the deeper issues of media bias and financial influence. His focus on attacking certain political figures aligns too neatly with the publication's broader agenda, raising the question: is Zapiro really a free thinker, or is he part of the machinery that keeps the Daily Maverick's funders happy?
In many ways, the Daily Maverick resembles an NGO more than a traditional media outlet. It has aligned itself with political figures, signed declarations, and cosied up to powerful financial backers—all of which should raise serious questions about its commitment to journalistic impartiality. The principle of reporting without fear or favour seems to have been sacrificed in favour of advancing the interests of those who control its purse strings.
As Brkic steps down, one thing is clear: his legacy will not be universally celebrated. For many South Africans, the Daily Maverick has become a platform that serves international and elite interests rather than meeting the needs of ordinary citizens. With its funding structures firmly in place and its editorial direction deeply entrenched, the Daily Maverick will likely continue on its current path—leaving us to wonder who it truly serves.
* Sipho Tshabalala is an independent writer and analyst.
** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Independent Media or IOL.