Special Hearings — Media Hearings — UNKNOWN

CRAIG KOTZE: I don't think that is necessarily correct.  As I see it, the media was an important component of our society and it had certain functions.	It therefore because of those functions, has enormous power and because of that power and because of the perception and the reality that it had in fact been infiltrated heavily by the agents of specific liberation movements, it was automatically turned into an arena of operations by the Security Forces.	And in that capacity, I agree fully in principle of objectivity for the media in a democratic order, but I think it would have been somewhat fatuous and quite futile in the 1980's Apartheid era to have tried to even strive for those, because nobody would have allowed you to do it.	There was no, Madam Chairperson, if I may add, there was no room for any ambivalence ultimately.

MS MKHIZE: I am sure your colleagues who worked with you then, will pick that up with you.  I just want to ask you about your manner of reporting.  Especially at the time when you had articles published in the Star regularly.	You seemed to report in a particular manner, you know, if we might use your words you seem to have a particular approach or orientation.  Was that influenced by your reaction to what you saw happening, the media being abused by liberation movements?

CRAIG KOTZE: In part, yes, but I think largely if you look at the reports that I have before me and I assume you have them before you too, of examples of stories that I had written, that very largely they were based on knowledge that was already publicly available.	And I think it was the SAUJ in their submission that I have read, who said that there is a natural empathy between crime reporters and police, to that extent certainly, yes, I would agree to that, so one tries to get the news from the police who are your main source.	I think, well obviously for me, I knew on what side I was.

MS MKHIZE: I am not a journalist by training, but I will just take one article, like for instance where it said Tutu's behaviour unacceptable, those were the headlines.

CRAIG KOTZE: What is the date Ma'am?

MS MKHIZE: It was in the Star, 31 August 1989 by Craig Kotze.  It says Law and Order Minister, Minister Adriaan Vlok last night accused Archbishop Desmond Tutu of having figuratively helped to set the world on fire and then claiming to be the peacemaker.	Mr Vlok, speaking at a meeting at Krugersdorp said he was very disappointed at his actions over the last few weeks.  The fact that he positions himself in the limelight in the company of the MDM, which I suppose you refer to mass democratic movement and their blatant attempts to once again plunge South Africa into a state of unrest, violence and chaos is unacceptable.	It looks like the end of the report and as I've said that I am not trained as a journalist, but can we refer to this as professional reporting?

CRAIG KOTZE: Well, first of all, I have already mentioned that the final product of any report was not in the hands of the reporter.  So I have had no control whatsoever over the final product of this particular report.	Secondly you will note that Mr Vlok was speaking at a public meeting and that all the other media were probably also there or had received copies of his speech.  So it was purely just factual reporting of what he had said.

CHAIRPERSON: No, but you see the issue that strikes one in this regard and taking into account the point that you make on page 9 of your submission, that you did not deliberately manipulate your reports or suppressed news, the point that occurs to one is that there is no reference to any comment by Archbishop Tutu to this opinion that is expressed by Mr Vlok.	So it seems to be a patently one-sided report and I think that is the point that Ms Mkhize is trying to put to you.

CRAIG KOTZE: Well, there was a modus operandi in the newsroom at the time that the crime reporter, namely myself, would make contact with the police and other reporters would also be tasked to go and try and broaden the story or get a new angle on the story from other sources.	As I say, I didn't have final control over the way this report was actually placed.  To be quite honest, I cannot remember the specific circumstances around this. Suffice to say that this was made at a public meeting of Mr Vlok at that time, and it was therefore quite legitimate reporting.

CHAIRPERSON: But it appears as an uncritical acceptance of his opinion you see, without - I had thought that there was some rule in journalism that you at least listen to the other side as well.	Or am I wrong, are there no such rule?

CRAIG KOTZE: No, there is most definitely such a rule, but as I mentioned Mr Chairman, that the final product was not in my hands.  My task was simply just to reflect this.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but it is quite clear from this, or are you suggesting that you would for example in your original report, you would have had Archbishop Tutu's response to this and that your Editors cut it out?

CRAIG KOTZE: No, I am not suggesting that at all.   What I am saying is that due to the prevailing modus operandi in the newsroom, it would have been somebody else's task to have gone and got his comment and send it through to the news Editor who would compile the final report.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, I see, so ...

CRAIG KOTZE: That is in principle - the specific circumstances surrounding this are no longer absolutely clear to me, because I cannot remember, but in principle I would imagine that was what happened.

MR LEWIN: Mr Chairman, could I interrupt there because we are chasing this holy grail of factual and objective reporting.  Could I refer to a later report in 1988, June 16, because this is a much longer one.	I would say from the look of it that it was probably a page 1 lead.   And it is the story, just to read the intro, of nine suspected ANC insurgents, three women amongst them, had been killed at a police roadblock near the Swaziland border in the past week.	Minister of Law and Order, Adriaan Vlok said yesterday - the story then goes on to add to that a little bit, quoting the Minister, but inserted into the story, under your by line, is the sentence other incidents were announced yesterday in Cape Town, a man was blown up in Wynberg, limpet bomb found next to his body.	Another limpet mine exploded in suburban railway line near Cape Town.  Three days ago in Natal a man died when he is set to have tried to sabotage a railway line near Underberg and then Mr Vlok is quoted as saying that the explosives blew up in his face.	I take that as bad subbing.  Nevertheless, it then goes on to go to return to the Swaziland story.  It is understood the women insurgents were the first to be killed by the police on South African  soil.  It seems that police, acting on information, were waiting for them.	One group was in a stolen minibus.  And then I am not sure, what is on a separate page here, so I am not sure whether it was the same page or whether it turned, but then quoting Mr Vlok, that when it was stopped at the roadblock, a man jumped out, opened fire.  It tells the whole story, the second Toyota Corolla, one of the occupants shot the police with a pistol.  No police casualties.	Then we end off that story and could you comment on whether you actually added this tail piece or whether it was done by the news Editor, which would have been very strange in my experience of news Editors, but nevertheless, at least another six alleged ANC members had blown themselves up recently while on their way to commit acts of sabotage or terror in various parts of the country, say Intelligence sources.	That is the whole story.  It is a lead, it is given big treatment in the star.  Can you comment on that as a search for this holy grail.