It is common knowledge that the Sunday Times and The Citizen originally failed to disclose that the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) had paid for their trip to Israel to write ‘balanced’ stories. 

To me, it is unthinkable that newspapers with the stature of those two would fail to mention that the SAJBD had sponsored their excursion.

Let me quote from Article 2.1 to 3.2 of the Press Code, to which those newspapers ascribe: 

‘The media shall:

• not allow commercial, political, personal or other non-professional considerations to influence reporting, and avoid conflict of interests as well as practices that could lead readers to doubt the media’s independence and professionalism;
• not accept any benefit which may influence coverage; and
• indicate clearly when an outside organisation has contributed to the cost of newsgathering.’

I must agree with Hassen Lorgat that this admission was not a mere mistake. It must have been deliberate – seasoned journalists would surely have known that they should not hide that their trip was sponsored.

This is, in fact, a scandal that has eroded the credibility of those newspapers, as well as that of the South African media in general.

As the former Press Ombudsman, I would not even allow a journalist to buy me a cup of coffee, for fear that the perception could be created that I was ‘bought’. Once, on a farm near Alexandra, the owner – who was also a complainant – offered me a jar of jam during my visit to the site. I refused the gift, for the same reason.

In this case, though, it was about more than a mere cup of coffee or a jar of jam – it was about the brutal and senseless killing of tens of thousands of Palestinians and of the inhumane blocking of food and medicine that are literally starving people to death.

Yes, I know that that was in reaction to Hamas’s attack on October 7, 2023 – but that does not justify the massacre that followed.

I have called the newspapers’ failure to disclose who had sponsored the trip a scandal. But there is even a deeper issue here. For why accept the offer in the first place? I would not put a foot on Israeli soil, not even if I get paid for it – that is, not while its apartheid government is still treating Palestinians the way it has been doing for decades. 

Yes, the newspapers have apologised for the ‘mistake’ for not having disclosed the sponsorship. However, that is a hollow admission, for it was more than a mistake – it was deliberate. What made it even worse, is that the mere fact that their journalists went to Israel gave credibility to Netanyahu’s reign of terror. I have not seen that the newspapers have apologised for that as well.

As a former Press Ombudsman, I am not going to interfere in the sanction that the present Ombudsman should apply in this case. I do know, though, what I would have done.

That said, the SAJBD should also do some serious introspection. What does it say of an organisation that is willing to pay journalists to write ‘balanced’ stories?

This recalls the conduct of the South African Jewish Report a few years ago. I have found against the publication and directed it to apologise for portraying as fact, both in the headline and in the body of the text, that a cartoon was anti-Semitic – and, in this process, for labelling an organisation as being anti-Semitic. The publication lodged an appeal against my ruling, which Judge Bernard Ngoepe declined.

The Jewish Report then refused to publish an apology, after which the Press Council expelled it. It was the first time that the Press Council had expelled a member.

Seen together, the conduct of the SAJBD and the Jewish Report did more harm to its cause than good.

Dr Johan Retief was Press Ombud of the Press Council of South Africa from 2009 till 2019. He is the author of Decoding the Code (Press Council of South Africa, 2019) and Media Ethics: An Introduction to Responsible Journalism (OUP, 2002).

https://muslimviews.co.za/former-press-ombud-rebukes-sajbd-sunday-times-and-the-citizen/