Skip to content

Public radio is a public good, not a propaganda mouthpiece

By Hassen Lorgat

 (Please note: this is not a complaint (yet) but a call for a deeper conversation)

The most recent motivation to write about this was SAfm’s The World View on  27 February 2025. The blurb set out the brief clearly: Today, we explore the prospects of the ceasefire holding, in the ongoing conflict and delve into the assertion by some analysts that Israel may not be genuinely interested in its success.

 The opening statements on this World View show by Thulasizwe Simelane set the tone for the show telling us that it was a right of reply to an earlier show. This was the interview of independent, expert commentator Dr Kingsly Makhubela. Makhubela has a degree in Diplomatic Studies and a PhD in Political Science from the University of Pretoria. He has served as Director-General of the Department of Tourism and currently is a risk analyst. In his presentation, he touched on the burning issues that all media was talking about. These issues revolved around whether Israel is really interested in pursuing the second phase of the ceasefire, and deaths by hyperthermia of children in Gaza.

I believe that, similar to two other cases I have studied, the so-called right of reply in this programme is pushed by management, despite their denials. After listening in, I can only conclude that the supposed rebuttal was a waste of air time and merely regurgitated the zionist talking points that Hirsch has articulated elsewhere, before. The Lt.-Col. (res.) Maurice Hirsch – Director of the Palestinian Authority Accountability Initiative – must have been put forward by the Jewish Board of Deputies.  I wonder why management did not do the basics and check out who they were imposing on the staff.

A cursory look reveals that Maurice Hirsch was actually Lt.-Col. (res.) who served as Director of the Military Prosecution for Judea and Samaria. His profile reads further thus: “Since retiring from the IDF, Hirsch worked as the Head of Legal Strategies for Palestinian Media Watch, as a Senior Military Consultant for NGO Monitor, an advisor to the Ministry of Defense, and head of an advisory committee in the Ministry of Interior. Hirsch was the architect of the Israeli law that strips citizenship from Israeli terrorists who have been convicted for terror offenses, sentenced to a custodial sentence, and receive a payment from the Palestinian Authority as a reward for their acts of terror.”

Whilst the website or the blurb does not indicate it, the experience is that it is likely to come from a complaint by the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBoD).

Adv Maurice Hirsch, or A Lt.-Col. (res.) Maurice Hirsch, belongs to Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs (JCFA) Strategic Alliances for a Secure, Connected, and Prosperous Region that has a dedicated section on how to combat the activities of the non violent civil society organisation. Under the heading Combating Delegitimization and BDS, South Africans would find this information useful. They write as follows:

“Combating Delegitimization and BDS is a major multilingual public diplomacy program exposing those forces that are questioning Israel’s very legitimacy, while carrying out initiatives to strengthen Israel’s fundamental right to security and to reinforce the connection between the Jewish people and their historical homeland including Jerusalem. The program also provides resources for commentators and educates students to effectively communicate these messages to promote attitude change in targeted populations.”

During the show, the Lt spoke of Israel’s commitment to the peace deal and blamed Hamas for almost everything, including the starvation of the Palestinians because humanitarian aid has been stolen by them. He argued similarly in the most recent article entitled The World Doesn’t Seem to Care About Gazans.

We must bear in mind that this is the same person who spoke on air about the most moral army undertaking incredibly humane fighting the war in Gaza. If this was so careful, why would there be a need to sort out unexploded weapons. He wrote elsewhere that:

“As a volatile ceasefire took hold, the UN estimated that it would take 21 years and over $1 billion just to remove the rubble in Gaza. In April 2024, the UN warned that clearing unexploded ordinance would take 14 years.”

The man’s bidding for the Trump proposals to depopulate Gaza and denationalise Palestians was repeated in the programme. In contrast, the voices that advocate for liberation and national sovereignty were not affirmed nor acknowledged.

When Palestinians and the international community, including the moderate Arab League, rejected Trump’s plan for Gaza, Hirsch condemned all their critics as fake humanitarians. He wrote:

“Following this obvious pattern, the fake humanitarians, the states that had until now declared their solidarity with the Gazans, and the entire UN mechanism competed with each other to see who could express the most outrageous condemnation of the Trump plan. For these charlatans, there could be no discussion whatsoever of offering the Gazans a future of hope. For these charlatans, the Gazans should be condemned to living in the rubble, with no electricity or water, and surrounded by unexploded ordinance. For these charlatans, Gazan children do not deserve an education. Suddenly, there is no “starvation.” Suddenly, there are sufficient medical facilities to provide for the needs of the Gazans.

The hypocrisy should fool no one.”

Finally, Makhubela´s studied comments were correct that Israel was not keen to follow the second phase of the ceasefire as agreed. Thus there was no need for a right of reply, in terms of the press and broadcasting codes. This right to reply was conceded by management over the heads of frontline workers. This is the same tactic used in other cases.

This case is similar to that I have written about in The case of the Lt General and 702 – lying in our faces. In this programme, the radio station granted a right of reply to guest Na’eem Jeenah. Management imposed it on the producers and presenters with a military person, and so Lt General Sarit Zehavi was put on air on 10 October 2024 in The Aubrey Masango Show.

In this case, it was not stated upfront that this show had come about because of the pressure – complaints from the SA Jewish Board of Deputies. So, how do we know? Well , it is easy. As we told the 702 management, the Board never fails to celebrate their victories. They tweeted and shared it on their website.

Bear with me. Another example also involves the SAfm, but this time the afternoon programme, The National Pulse hosted by Ashraf Garda, and expert witness Tembisa Fakude. My correspondence then was with SAfm management. I pointed out that the producers and presenters hosted an expert (September 2024) but again Management caved in and granted a right of reply over the heads of the frontline workers.  Public commentator Fakuda, a Senior Research fellow Africa-Asia Dialogues who worked at Al Jazeera Center for Studies, was asked to provide context to the mass protests in Israel against Netanyahu, after six hostages were found dead in Gaza.  The station granted Ruth Wasserman Lande the right of reply. To be fair to the station, SAfm were transparent and told us in the blurb that Fakude made remarks that the South African Zionist Federation felt needed to be challenged as, according to them, they were not a true reflection of what’s happening in that region. What was not emphasized was the military rank of the guest.

Before I conclude, I want to make the defence of public broadcasting and media as a commons. I am a firm believer that quality public services are a great equaliser and an instrument of justice. It follows that public broadcasting, and in particular public, free to air radio is a public good, a common – essential to granting voices unheard off to be aired. In this regard, it speaks truth to fellow citizens and, by doing so, develops critical mass which those in power ignore at their peril.

It is in this regard that I want to sound the alarm at a stratum of management that has given ground to outside lobby groups to undermine the open debates and conversations that have emerged.

They put under threat the idea that public media, freely broadcast media, is a commons.  It is publicly owned and guided by us, those who listen and watch attentively and participate in the life of the station. It is open to all who listen and engage through calls in shows, it is diverse and pluralist.

Especifically, I have observed the following trends:

  1. The dedicated,  honest and hard working journalists have been undermined and forced to be complicit in genocide by white-washing Israe’s war crimes.
  2. Management has put pressure in all the cases that I have studied and, at this stage, it is unclear how much of the board’s at Primedia and at the Public Broadcaster are aware of this violation of free speech and worker rights. We must further study what the underlying assumptions are for management’s inability to support their staff for doing their daily work. Is it a fear of controversy?
  3. Usually, the complainants behind this spurious claims of bias or lack of balance are not named upfront to all the listeners. We only discover a few cases after the fact. This was also revealed in the tragic case of young journalist Zweli Mbhele. The radio presenter during October 2023 was forced to apologise by the Primedia group chief Mr Lindile Xoko. The full saga of how Zweli was lashed can be found on this web.
  4. I wonder why the South African media houses find it fit to provide a right of reply for a perceived inaccuracy to a Zionist inspired organisation who then put forward Zionists in the studio. Are the Zionists the only ones we can rely on for ethical journalism inspired by truth and accuracy? The boards of both organisations – SAfm and Primedia – must answer as it appears to be a misreading of what is required by the media regulatory bodies, the Press Council and the BCCSA. What is clear is that they are trying to skin-graft balance in a highly unequal situation where the asymmetries of power are plain to see by all. But it does beg the question whether there is an automatic right of reply to some groups as argued many years ago about the SABC and the SAJBoD. This was raised in the media following the 2013 BCCSA case that I authored.
  5. ALL the respondents, including this recent SAfm Makhubela / Lt.-Col. (res.) Maurice Hirsch and those who speak for the other side, are or were members of Israel’s Occupying Force that stands accused by international tribunals (in particular the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court) of occupation, ethnic cleansing and genocide. Both Netanyahu and Gantz have warrants of their arrest before the ICC.

I humbly request that management desist from interference in the work of the journalists and the boards of governance seriously consider this threat to media freedom. What this is is but a call for an open conversation  about what they understand by balance in the time of a genocide, as well as why they do not think they have the power to oppose the flak and unfair pressures on the station concerned.

 

 

 

Hassen Lorgat
Latest posts by Hassen Lorgat (see all)