African Moral Theory and Media Ethics: An Exploration of Rulings by the South African Press Council 2018 to 2022

ABSTRACT

In light of a history of an unethical news media system used by the state as an instrument of oppression, media ethics in South Africa is intended to uphold the foundational tenets of journalism and play a pivotal role in addressing issues of diversity, equity, and social justice. Most recently, the 2021 Inquiry into Media Ethics and Credibility report instructed media watchdogs, such as the South African Press Council, to track data concerning ethical breaches based on the potential that such data can contribute to transparency and accountability. This study examines the trends in ethical issues raised in rulings by the South African Press Council (PCSA) over the period 2018–2022. Our analysis found that most of the South African news media publications registered with PCSA have a good track record when it comes to upholding ethical standards. However, a few publications have a disproportionate share of the complaints against them.

In an age dominated by the relentless flow of information, media ethics has emerged as an indispensable guardian of truth, objectivity, and public trust (Ahmed et al., 2020; Daniels, 2023; Sanders, 2021). It is the moral compass that guides journalists, media organizations ,and regulatory bodies in navigating the complex, ever-evolving landscape of news reporting (Sarikakis & Winter, 2021). Faced with the digital era’s challenges, media ethics become crucial in molding public discourse and shaping a free and informative press. Media ethics is the study of the moral principles that should guide the practice of journalism and other forms of mass communication (Tsukamoto, 2006). McQuail (2010, p. 172) posits that “a journalist’s code of ethics refers to a set of principles of professional conduct adopted and controlled by journalists themselves.” These include accuracy, fairness, privacy, non-discrimination, and avoiding sensationalism. Therefore, we may regard ethics as a behavioral science of moral judgment, as a group of concrete prescriptions drawing from moral systems. Our study follows Firmstone’s perspective (Firmstone, 2023, p. 113) that journalistic standards and ethics are more than individual beliefs. Instead, these practices are collective and function within institutions with rules and ethical cultures, highlighting the interconnectedness of personal and institutional ethics in journalism.

In the South African context, where media diversity is crucial for post-apartheid democracy and societal transformation, the significance of media ethics is more pronounced. The news media system here has a history of being used by the state to oppress the majority (Merrett, 2001). In the democratic dispensation, the media has staked its role in building a democratic society, with media ethics intended to uphold the foundational tenets of journalism and play a pivotal role in addressing issues of diversity, equity, and social justice (Nkoala & Matsilele, 2021). In the recent past, the 2021 Inquiry into Media Ethics and Credibility report explored the ethical violations of mainstream media outlets as investigated by an independent commission initiated by the South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF) (Satchwell et al., 2021). According to the South African National Editors Forum (2021):

The Inquiry was proactively set up following the events surrounding the publication and subsequent retraction of a series of stories by the Sunday Times between 2011 and 2016 and public debates about reporting in newsrooms nationwide. The terms of reference of the Inquiry were to look at possibilities of ethical lapses across the industry and to find solutions to enhance quality, ethical journalism.

The Sunday Times is one of South Africa’s most influential weekly broadsheet newspapers, with circulation figures of more than 92,000 in 2023 (Breitenbach, 2023). While the Inquiry primarily focused on publication-specific matters, it revealed a standard set of systemic challenges threatening ethical practices throughout the news media landscape (Satchwell et al., 2021, p. 1). The report names these issues as including:

the effective exercise of editorial and sub-editing checks and balances; the social media-fuelled pressure to break stories ever faster amidst competing mis- and disinformation narratives; societal pressures – including harassment and official disdain and manipulation – on reporters; and lacunae in the scope and powers of regulatory bodies. (Satchwell et al., 2021, p. 1)

The Inquiry framed these ethical breaches as products of a media landscape historically marked by control, censorship, and manipulation (Satchwell et al., 2021, p. 2). Apartheid, a system of state-sanctioned racial segregation, was instituted officially in South Africa from 1948 to 1994 (Dubow, 2014). A key aspect of this system involved controlling information about events in South Africa through state-owned media organizations (Merrett, 2001). The regime suppressed independent journalism, using media to silence dissent through censorship, harassment, and detaining journalists and writers. The discussions on media ethics in South Africa are often shaped by the need to confront apartheid’s legacy, promote inclusivity, handle freedom of expression, and cultivate public trust and credibility (Lloyd, 2013).

In response to this problem, the South African news media sector established the South African Press Council (PCSA) as a co-regulatory system committed to upholding media ethics, responsible journalism, and resolving media content complaints (Berger, 2010). Co-regulation in media refers to the combination of self-regulation by media industries and regulation from the state or public (Prosser, 2008). In this co-regulatory system, the PCSA “provides impartial, expeditious and cost-effective adjudication to settle disputes between newspapers, magazines and online publications, on the one hand, and members of the public, on the other, over the editorial content of publications” (PCSA, 2023). To give effect to this, the Council uses the South African Press Code “to guide journalists in their daily practice of gathering and distributing news and opinion and to guide the Press Ombud and the Appeals Panel to reach decisions on complaints from the public” (PCSA, 2023). The Inquiry made critical recommendations for enhancing the co-regulatory system and addressing ethical violations, stating that the PCSA should “issue annual reports on trends concerning media ethics and conduct violations” (Satchwell et al., 2021, p. 366) while also strengthening its “capacity for compiling statistics and noting trends” (Satchwell et al., 2021, p. 362). This aims to enhance transparency and accountability by providing a platform for stakeholders while enabling assessment of the industry’s ethical standards and performance on an ongoing basis.

This study speaks to this recommendation as it examines the trends in ethical issues raised in complaints to the PCSA from 2018 to 2022. It explores the following questions:

RQ1a:

What are the trends in ethical issues that the public has complained about to the Press Council over 2018–2022?

RQ1b:

Which sections of the press code do these address?

RQ1c:

What are the common patterns among authors and publications that receive the most complaints?

RQ2:

What are the patterns in complainants filing complaints and the media houses and journalists being complained about?

By addressing these questions, the study contributes to research on media ethics and public trust by responding to the 2021 Inquiry’s request for data-driven approaches to improve transparency and accountability in news media.

Literature review

Media scholars’ interest in South African news media ethics has focused on the centrality of ethics in journalism, with scholars such as Louw (1992) and Froneman (1993) examining the challenges of establishing ethical media norms during a transitional period from apartheid. The emphasis in Louw’s (1992) study is on the influence of ownership on information bias. During the post-apartheid era, researchers have focused on the interplay between government and media, examining the state’s impact on media ethics, privacy and public interest (Wasserman & Boloka, 2004; Wasserman & De Beer, 2005). Wasserman (2013, p. 128) argues that in South Africa, “the tension between the newly acquired democratic right to freedom of expression and the imperative on the media to contribute to the restoration of the right to dignity remains the center of the debates about media ethics.”

Researchers have also been actively investigating the impact of digital media, particularly social media, on news media practices in South Africa to understand better the role of these technologies in shaping media ethics (Mpofu et al., 2023; Mukhudwana, 2021; Paterson, 2013). Mpofu et al. (2023) argue that social media has altered media ethics by reconfiguring and restructuring journalism practice, echoing Fourie’s (2017, p. 109) assertion that shifting from mass communication to network communication requires a new understanding of media ethics.

Among these areas of study, scholars have concentrated on the significance of the PCSA. Researchers have analyzed the entity’s evolution, structure, and contribution to advancing ethical journalism in South Africa (Berger, 2010; Duncan, 2014; Sindane, 2018). Berger (2010) highlights that South Africa’s extensive media regulation history offers valuable lessons, making the Press Council an ideal case study. Meanwhile, Duncan (2014, p. 167) contends that political economy considerations indicate that the system avoids offending the industry while effectively dealing with breaches. The aftermath of the 2021 Inquiry has prompted scholars to scrutinize the findings about the PCSA and its involvement in maintaining media ethics. The report highlights Daniels’s (2023, p. 380) exploration of the master signifier and its connection to journalists who breach ethical codes. Conversely, Mukhudwana’s (2021) analysis uses the occasion of the Inquiry to highlight the emergence of a new trend in South African journalism ethics, namely social media mobs that act as an informal regulation of journalism.

African moral theory and media ethics

This study adopts African moral theory to examine the PCSA’s rulings and shed light on media ethics concerns. African moral theory’s ethical principles and values are derived from various African cultural and philosophical traditions (Metz, 2007). It is not a monolithic or uniform theory; it underscores communalism, interdependence, and the significance of societal relationships (Molefe, 2017). Ubuntu, a term from the Nguni language that loosely translates into “humanness,” or the maxim “I am because we are,” is a crucial tenant of African moral philosophy and underscores the interconnectedness of humanity, emphasizing qualities such as compassion, empathy, and mutual respect.

Metz (2015) argues that African moral theory and journalism intersect in several interesting ways, offering a fresh perspective on ethical considerations for journalists. This entails leading journalistic practices toward a heightened emphasis on the community’s well-being beyond individuals or specific groups. It also means prioritizing honest journalism, foregrounding diverse perspectives, and avoiding divisive or damaging content. This approach steers clear of sensationalism, harmful stereotypes, and needless negativity. Instead, journalists are orientated to seek fairness, accuracy, and integrity through this framework. This is linked to journalistic content that serves the public good rather than focusing on profit-driven sensationalism. In their paper, “Decolonial Journalism: New Notes on Ubuntu and the Public Interest,” Chasi and Rodny-Gumede (2022, 1634) argue that when journalism is considered through the notion of ubuntu, it:

allows for deliberation on diverging views in the interest of finding the common good and enables the emergence of social orders that are capable of attaining, maintaining, and advancing peace and security to the extent that it provides for such free and sometimes conflictual social interaction.

They present a framework of guiding principles for this approach (Chasi & Rodny-Gumede, 2022, 1633):

• 1.Journalists encourage communal harmony through inclusive narratives, respectful representation, and content that fosters constructive dialogue.

• 2.Journalists promote cooperation by reporting with balance, highlighting common ground, and fostering empathy for diverse viewpoints.

• 3.Journalists encourage informed debate and critical reflection on individuals and institutions, aligning with African values of open communication and shared responsibility for transparency and accountability.

• 4.Journalists provide accurate and unbiased information, promoting intellectual honesty and encouraging mature engagement with complex issues.

• 5.Journalists respect the audience’s right to knowledge and recognize their potential to contribute meaningfully to society when provided with truthful information, granting them recognition and dignity.

The PCSA’s Press Code is well aligned with this decolonial framework because even in its preamble, it states that its view is that “[t]he media exist to serve society. Their freedom provides for independent scrutiny of the forces that shape society and is essential to realizing the promise of democracy” (PCSA, 2023). This aligns with the African moral theory emphasis on community well-being and African moral theory. In its principles of gathering and reporting news, it states that the media must:

• 1.Ensure that news is reported accurately and fairly.

• 2.Present news with balance and integrity without distorting or omitting important information.

This resonates with truthfulness and intellectual honesty, which are crucial for constructive dialogue and shared understanding. Section 3 of the Press Code, concerning privacy, dignity, and recognition, acknowledges the audience’s right to knowledge and dignity, as stated by both the Press Code and Metz’s argument.

While applying African moral philosophy to journalism ethics has faced criticism for cultural relativism and practical challenges (Fourie, 2008), its alignment with South Africa’s Press Code suggests a need to reconsider these critiques. The intersection of African moral theory and the Press Code emphasizes the need to incorporate varied ethical viewpoints in journalism. Therefore, incorporating this framework into our study deepens our grasp of media ethics and underscores the significance of cultural and philosophical traditions in influencing ethical standards in journalism.

Method

This mixed methods study utilized an embedded research design to examine patterns in Press Council rulings between 2018 and 2022. The individual rulings issued by the Press Council served as the unit of analysis. The reason for using rulings as our unit of study is that our research questions are centred explicitly on trends in ethical issues raised in these rulings. Examining Press Council rulings from 2018 to 2022 provides insights into the news media industry’s ethical problems. Each ruling offers in-depth information on the complaint, parties, ethics breach, final ruling, and decision rationale. The rich dataset allows for in-depth analysis of media ethics trends. Further, the rulings are centered around ethical standards outlined in the press code, providing a clear framework for evaluating journalistic practices and behaviors. Analyzing these rulings allowed us to assess ethical compliance and pinpoint areas for improvement. The Press Council’s website has publicly available documents detailing specific complaints and their resolutions.

The study is deemed a mixed methods study because the analysis approaches used were quantitative and qualitative. We quantified the number of times specific authors were complained about, the number of times particular sections of the press code were referred to in different complaints, the number of times a publication was complained about, and the number of times different categories of complainants lodged complaints, among others, to map trends over time. Meanwhile, a qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the elaboration on the ruling aspects of the documents, where the Press Council usually explains how it has come to its findings and rulings.

There were 216 rulings considered, as indicated in Table 1. Within those rulings, mention was made of 49 publications and reference to over 150 authors of the articles, who are primarily the journalists who wrote the stories.

Table 1. Overview of the data analyzed.

Period considered	2018–2022
Total number of cases considered	216
Total number of publications	49
Total number of authors	158

The researchers entered the information on the rulings into an Excel spreadsheet and then created pivot tables to provide graphical data that speaks to:

• 1.the patterns in terms of the authors most frequently complained about

• 2.the publications most frequently complained about

• 3.the trends in the complainants sending the complaints

• 4.the sections of the press code most frequently referenced in the complaints.

These then provide an overview of the trends in ethical issues that the public has sent complaints to the Press Council from 2018 to 2022. To keep the focus on the general trends and avoid focusing on individuals, we have chosen to use generic references to the authors and the publications.

Results and discussion

Authors who were most frequently complained about

Figure 1 summarizes the complaints made against the authors of the articles complained about. One can deduce from this figure that almost 80% of authors were accused of only one offense throughout the five years, suggesting that most journalists were not offenders, let alone repeat offenders when it comes to breaching the Press Code.

Figure 1. Complaints per author (percent).

Figure 2 illustrates the top five authors with the most complaints. Author A faced six complaints, three classified as Tier 2, highlighting recurring ethical concerns. Author B received four complaints, two Tier 1 and three Tier 2, with the Press Council dismissing three, resulting in a one-in-four contravention ratio. Author C’s pattern mirrors Author B’s. Author D garnered four grievances, one Tier 1 and two Tier 2, with two dismissals aligning with low complaint rates. Author E received four complaints, with two dismissals, one Tier 1 and two Tier 2.

Figure 2. Number of rulings against the top 5 authors with the most complaints against them.

African moral theory emphasizes the press’s obligation to serve the public interest (Chasi & Rodny-Gumede, 2022). This includes providing accurate and truthful information, promoting civic discourse, and holding powerful institutions accountable. The findings suggest that the South African press generally does a good job of upholding its African moral theory in this respect. The fact that the Press Council dismissed the majority of complaints against journalists suggests that journalists generally adhere to ethical standards as per the Press Code. However, it is essential to note that even a small number of upheld complaints can significantly impact the public’s trust in the media. Therefore, journalists must be constantly vigilant and strive to meet the highest ethical standards.

The offenses journalists were accused of pertain to the general normative expectations of reporting truthfully, accurately, in a fair manner, and being neutral. As our data show, most of the allegations levelled against these authors were dismissed. This, therefore, might mean that the allegations in most cases are meritless based on the Press Code, suggesting the motivatoin behind them may be due to story subjects’ general dislike of certain stories written about them rather than journalists violating the ethics code.

Publications that were most frequently complained about

We also examined the publications that received the highest number of complaints as part of our analysis of the rulings. There were 144 complaints filed against 49 publications (Figure 3). More than 50% received one complaint, 20% received two, and about 15% had seven or more. The ones with seven or more complaints also had the highest number of complaints against several journalists. According to Figure 3, most publications follow the Press Code.

Figure 3. Complaints against publications.

Conversely, some journalists disregard the Press Code, even after multiple infractions. The press council’s complaints procedure is designed so the publication apologizes for any contravention. This might give the impression that a specific publication is a repeat offender when it is just one journalist. Even after the journalist has moved on, this could still impact a publication’s reputation.

However, the offense should not be seen as the responsibility of just one person, despite being directly connected to the journalist who wrote the story. Violations of editorial policies are failures involving other individuals, such as the editor, who may not be identified in the grievances. Therefore, publications must adopt a dual strategy: holding journalists accountable for misconduct and strengthening editorial processes. This finding raises further ethical concerns when viewed through African moral theory. Journalists are responsible for serving the public by being accurate, promoting civic discourse, and holding powerful institutions accountable. Failing to meet these standards undermines public trust in journalists and hinders their democratic role. The correlation between journalists (Figure 2) and publications (Figure 3) with the most complaints suggests a systemic problem in some publications. These publications may need to provide more training or support to their journalists, or they may be fostering an unsupportive work environment for ethical journalism.

Figure 4 illustrates findings against publications with seven or more complaints against them and shows that most of these were ultimately dismissed as they were found not to violate the Press Code.

Figure 4. Findings against publications with seven or more complaints against them (percent).

Meanwhile, Figure 5, which depicts findings against publications with seven or more complaints against them, paints a concerning picture that one publication committed eight Tier 2 offenses while other top violators committed four or more.

Figure 5. Findings against publications with seven or more complaints against them.

Delving into more detail on some of the Tier 2 contraventions, in one instance, for example, “The gist of the complaint is that the ‘report’ which the publication based its story on did not exist.” In another ruling, the publication was directed to “unreservedly apologize to the [complainant] and to all those individuals who were affected by the reportage for repeatedly and unfairly neglecting to give them a right of reply to serious allegations leveled against them.” Tier 2 offenses refer to “serious breaches.” These contraventions are not a simple lapse in applying the code but suggest a severe break of journalistic ethics. For publications to be guilty of these four to eight times over five years might not be viewed as a big deal, but in terms of reputation, it is notable. Also, the sections breached tend to be concerned with reporting truthfully, accurately and fairly, presenting news in context and giving subjects the right to reply.

Complaints by different social actors/entities

The media is sometimes held accountable through the courts, where judges become arbiters of editorial judgment and press responsibility. As an alternative, the Press Council provides a forum for complainants to express their discontent against the actions of the news media. However, who are these complainants? What are their identity patterns? Extant studies about Press Council complainants focus predominantly on their attitudes toward the news media and the perceived effectiveness of the Press Council by complainants (Fengler et al., 2015). Such research is essential to understand how those who use the service of the Press Council view the system and its functionality. However, very little has been done about the nature of their identity. In having one of the objectives of this study being to examine patterns in the complainants, the aim was to address this gap by reviewing complainants’ identities and socio-political demographics. Analyzing complaints filed revealed diverse social actors and their affiliations.

Figure 6 shows individuals filed 41% of all complaints. Non-profit organizations accounted for 7% of total complainants to the PCSA, mainly concerning reputation, right of reply, and truthfulness issues. The study revealed that corporate companies accounted for 16% of complaints, prioritizing reputation matters. Famous individuals constituted 5% of complainants, while religious figures comprised 15%.

Figure 6. Complainants by different actors/entities (percent).

Famous complainants focused on defamation and the right to reply, expressing concerns about privacy breaches and sensationalization. Corporations, celebrities, and politicians often employed third parties such as lawyers and PR agents to file complaints with the PCSA, aiming to address breaches of the Press Code, particularly concerning privacy and defamation issues.

We also found that 12% of complainants were government entities, with individual politicians comprising 8% and state-owned entities 7%. Politically affiliated parties therefore accounted for 27% of all complaints. Further, the data reveals that journalists comprise less than 1% of PCSA complainants, indicating they may be less inclined to complain about peers directly. Journalists might prefer professional bodies such as SANEF for grievances. Many complaints seem self-interested rather than addressing public interest or significant media responsibilities, such as coverage of minority and women’s issues, indicating a broader scope for the PCSA’s engagement.

In his study, Hermanson (1993) found that complainants approached press councils seeking vindication and recognition rather than financial compensation. They felt powerless to address media wrongdoing alone, emphasizing the role of press councils in maintaining media accountability. Similarly, our research confirms that press councils cater to a sophisticated audience, including educated, affluent individuals, corporations, and politicians. Some act on behalf of those unable to advocate for themselves.

Sections of the press code that are most frequently cited in complaints

Figure 7 below is a graphical depiction of the sections of the press code that complainants most frequently referenced.

Figure 7. Top ten sections of the press code most frequently cites in complaints (percent).

For our analysis, we consider the sections of the Press Code that were cited in at least a third (33%) of the complaints, namely:

The media shall:

• 1.1: take care to report news truthfully, accurately and fairly (76%)

• 1.8: shall verify the accuracy of doubtful information, if practicable; if not, this shall be stated (54%)

• 1.2: media shall present only what may reasonably be true as fact; opinions, allegations, rumors or suppositions shall be presented clearly as such (53%)

• 3.3: The media shall exercise care and consideration in matters involving dignity and reputation (47%)

Section 1.1: The media shall take care to report news truthfully, accurately and fairly

The Press Code prioritizes truth as a fundamental journalistic ethic, crucial for media credibility. However, Kruger (2004, p. 77) argues that truth has limitations due to differing ideological views among journalists and media houses. He emphasizes that truth, accuracy and fairness are essential journalistic values (Kruger 2004, p. 12). Our study highlights complainants’ concerns that journalists often neglect truthful storytelling, tarnishing reputations and credibility. This underscores the importance of verifying information with sources before publication, as advocated by Hermida (2015). For instance, a Sunday Times article on Phumelela Dhlomo (3 August 2018) contained alleged factual inaccuracies, misquotes, and defamatory statements, prejudicing the reputation of the Road Accident Fund (RAF) and its executives. The complainant disputed the existence of a contract with Gxakwe Projects for leasing chairs, refuting the alleged monthly rental cost and asserting the RAF’s timely response to inquiries, unacknowledged by the newspaper. In another case, Motsoasele Leballo (22 January 2018) and his family filed a complaint against the Mail & Guardian for an article allegedly wrongly identifying Potlako Leballo as a child rapist. They argued the headline was misleading, misrepresenting the interviewee’s quotes about “rape” and falsely reporting a roster of women soldiers to clean Leballo’s house. Additionally, Leballo was not given a chance to respond to the allegations. The same was alleged in the Department of Human Settlements case in the Free State Province vs. News24 (18 June 2018). The Department of Human Settlements in the Free State Province filed a complaint against News24, alleging a breach of the Press Code. They accused reporter Pieter-Louis Myburgh of encouraging employees via e-mail to divulge corruption-related information, risking their jobs. Myburgh, they claim, circumvented legal processes like the Promotion of Access to Information Act.

Examining such cases reveals disputes over the truthfulness of journalistic articles, highlighting the contested nature of news, labeled “fake news” by dissenting parties. Waisbord (2018) observes that fake news reflects contemporary belief formation dynamics. Subjects such as Phumelela Dhlomo and Leballo contest articles they deem untruthful or lack the right to reply. This underscores the necessity for journalists to exercise caution and ensure all parties receive equitable coverage. Kruger (2004, p. 77) emphasizes fairness, stressing the inclusion of diverse perspectives in news stories, a principle that is crucial in mitigating harm and upholding journalistic integrity in the face of contentious narratives.

Section 1.8: The media shall present news in context and in a balanced manner, with no intentional or negligent departure from the facts

Presenting news with context and balance upholds truthfulness, accuracy, and fairness principles, fostering a deeper understanding of events. It enhances transparency, showing thorough research and verification by journalists. In Africa, this approach embraces cultural sensitivity and diverse voices, avoiding stereotypes (Chasi & Rodny-Gumede, 2022). More than half the complaints to the Press Council cited journalists’ failure in this regard. Complainants stress the need to accurately articulate their perspectives in news reports to safeguard reputations, highlighting the importance of inclusive representation and balanced coverage in media ethics. Section 1.8 of the Press Code speaks to this.

In the 2021 Imtiaz Fazel vs Mail & Guardian case (22 April 2021), Fazel raised concerns about the lack of the right to reply before publishing the first article. He believed this omission led to false and damaging allegations against him and the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI). In another complaint, Deputy Principal Hanna Pretorius of Domino Servite School lodged a complaint against News24 regarding its “Exodus video” and reportage on alleged wrongdoings at KwaSizabantu (KSB) Mission (19 January 2021). The Press Council ruled that Pretorius objected to the portrayal of wrongdoing at KSB, including abuse allegations against her daughter. Pretorius also accused News24 of distorting testimony through redaction and editing. One aspect complained about was that News24 had “redacted and edited (Louise’s) testimony so that her opinion was distorted.” A final example is the Dr. Blade Nzimande vs. City Press complaint (9 February 2021), where Nzimande complained that a statement in the news report that he had “chosen” his adviser, Mr Nqaba Nqandela, to head a task team lacked context (read: unbalanced) as the journalist did not ask relevant questions that would have made a material difference to the story.

Section 1.2: The media shall present only what may reasonably be true as fact; opinions, allegations, rumours or suppositions shall be presented clearly as such

Differentiating between factual information and opinions/speculations in news is crucial for audience clarity. While referencing rumors and allegations for context is permissible, journalists must clearly label opinions and unconfirmed claims. This transparency aids readers in distinguishing between verified facts and interpretations. In the digital era, where information spreads rapidly, adhering to Section 1.2 of the press code – presenting only verified facts – becomes paramount. One-third of complaints highlighted media entities’ failure to comply with this standard, underscoring its importance in journalistic practice.

In the 2018 Kaizer Chiefs vs. Sunday World complaint (14 March 2018), Chiefs contested the article and its headline, deeming them dishonest and biased. They criticized using unverified rumors without affording involved parties a fair chance to respond. In a 2020 Zakhele Khumalo vs Ilanga case, Khumalo objected to an article mentioning a building as a school and disputed a sentence based on unverified rumors. A third example is the South African Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Coalition & General Industrial Workers Union of South Africa (Giwusa) vs. South African Jewish Report (SAJR) matter where, among others, the SA BDS Coalition and Giwusa complain that the statement that Milco SA, Clover’s holding company, did not operate in the occupied territories was false and unverified.

The examples underscore public concerns regarding news reports that fail to meet ethical standards, relying on unsubstantiated sources or publishing unverified information. They highlight the importance of diligent verification and clear differentiation between rumors and facts. Failure erodes trust in reputable news outlets, fostering uncertainty and misinformation. Given South Africa’s unique historical context, such differentiation is critical, considering the country’s apartheid legacy and ongoing social challenges. The country’s history of apartheid has left a lasting impact on society and the media landscape, where news media were an instrument that deliberately spread misinformation to further the ends of the prevailing sociopolitical system of segregation. Sensationalism and misinformation exacerbate tensions and hinder constructive dialogue on issues such as poverty, crime, inequality, and political controversies, perpetuating societal divisions. Clear, ethical journalism is paramount for rebuilding trust and fostering informed discourse in South African media.

Section 3.3: The media shall exercise care and consideration in matters involving dignity and reputation, which may be overridden only if it is in the public interest

For investigative journalism, the ethical challenge lies in balancing privacy, public interest, and the right to know. Human rights, including privacy and dignity, intersect with reputation and defamation concerns. Distinguishing between public and private figures is central to journalists’ ethical dilemmas. Apuke (2016) discusses character assassination in Nigerian politics, an unethical practice aimed at damaging individuals’ reputations. He highlights junk journalism, which sensationalises nformationfor emotional reaction, as a part of this. Sensationalizing public figures’ personal lives may be unethical if inaccurate and not in the public interest. Public figures, politicians, and institutions primarily challenge this aspect of the Press Code, as seen in Figure 6. Powerful elites may exploit the code to shield their image, punish probing journalists, or induce self-censorship.

For example, in the case of Gouws vs Sunday Times, Christiaan Gouws, a director at Shelf Company Warehouse (30 January 2019), complained that the journalist confused “shell” and “shelf” companies, implying his company dealt with post-sale matters. He refuted claims of selling companies to the Gupta family without verification, alleging the article tarnished his integrity and bona fide status. Additionally, the report suggested he withheld the buyer’s name, insinuating evasion and complicity in unlawful activities, damaging his reputation and that of his company.

Another case is Thembinkosi Joseph Gumede vs Daily Sun. Gumede filed a defamation case against the Daily Sun (31 May 2020). The article accused Gumede of mismanaging funds and members wanting him gone, which he deemed defamatory. The findings were that the Daily Sun had transgressed sections 1.1., 1.2 and 1.3 of the Press Code and section 3.3 on a Tier 2 offense. The newspaper was, therefore, ordered to retract the story and apologize.

Conclusion

The finding that most South African news media publications have a good track record when upholding ethical standards is a positive one. However, it is concerning to find that a few publications have a disproportionate share of the complaints against them. This suggests there may be a systemic problem at some publications, whereby journalists are not adequately trained or supported, or the work environment does not encourage ethical journalism. The finding that a number of the journalists with the most complaints against them are affiliated with the publications with the most complaints against them further reinforces the suggestion that there may be a systemic problem at some publications. This could be due to several factors, such as a lack of editorial oversight, a culture of competition that encourages journalists to cut corners, or a lack of resources to support journalists in doing their jobs properly.

Considering these findings through African moral theory as a framework helps us think about this data in terms of the ethical obligations of journalists (Metz, 2007). Journalists should serve the public interest, including upholding ethical standards such as accuracy, fairness, and respect for privacy. When journalists fail to meet these standards, they erode public trust in the media, making it more difficult for the media to fulfil its vital role in a democracy.

Regarding the entities who submitted complaints, the majority were individuals, corporations, politicians, and religious figures. These groups are likelier to have the resources and time to devote to the complaint process. From an African moral theory perspective, this finding is concerning. African moral theory emphasizes the obligation of the media to serve the public interest. This includes providing accurate and truthful information, promoting civic discourse, and holding powerful institutions accountable. However, if the Press Council is only used by a small and elite group of complainants, it is not fulfilling its role as a watchdog for the public interest.

The findings related to the sections of the Press Code that are most frequently cited in complaints suggest that many complaints to the Press Council of South Africa relate to factual accuracy, reputation, and privacy issues. These findings are concerning from an African moral theory perspective, as they suggest that some news publications are not adequately upholding their ethical obligations to the public. African moral theory emphasizes the responsibility of the media to serve the public interest. This includes providing accurate and truthful information and respecting privacy and dignity. News publications that fail to meet these ethical standards erode public trust in the media, making it more difficult for the media to fulfill its vital role in democracy. The examples provided in this section illustrate how some news publications need to catch up to these ethical standards. For example, some publications have relied on unsubstantiated sources, published unverified information, and sensationalized personal information. Other publications have damaged the reputations of individuals and institutions through inaccurate and unfair reporting.

These ethical breaches have several negative consequences. First, they erode public trust in the media. When people cannot be confident that their news is accurate and fair, they are less likely to rely on the media for information. This can make it more difficult for people to make informed decisions about important issues. Second, ethical breaches can have a significant impact on the individuals and institutions that are targeted. When a person’s reputation is damaged by inaccurate or unfair reporting, it can be challenging to repair. This can negatively affect their career, personal life, and physical and mental health. Finally, ethical breaches can undermine the ability of the media to hold powerful institutions accountable. When the public does not trust journalists, their ability to investigate and report on wrongdoing is diminished. This can make it more difficult to expose corruption and abuse of power.

Further, many complaints to the Press Council of South Africa relate to reputation issues, and many of the most egregious examples of ethical breaches involve reputational damage. This is concerning from an African moral theory perspective, as it suggests that some news publications are not adequately upholding their obligation to respect the dignity and reputation of individuals and institutions. African moral theory emphasizes the importance of the media serving the public interest, including respecting individuals’ rights (Metz, 2007).

By nature, most press councils release annual reports, periodic reports on the state of the media, and specific publications relating to the standards, guidelines, and policies. In-depth reports such as the Satchwell Ethics Report (2021) also are commissioned and published. The Press Council of South Africa is no stranger to in-depth self-assessment reports. For example, from recommendations of the PFC in 2012, the press council released a report detailing the new press code, complaints procedure and constitution. This report ushered in a move from self-regulatory to co-regulation. The focus of this study was not to analyze the changes in the number and nature of complaints over the years, though that could be a topic of interest. Due to limiting the findings to aspects that could be consolidated into a single study while engaging in sufficiently in-depth analysis to allow us to answer our questions, we opted not to consider the increases and decreases over time. Moreover, the Press Council already engages in internal monitoring, though it does not necessarily provide public reports. Again, due to scope, other relevant aspects of the rulings could have been discussed in detail, such as the reasons the Press Council provides when it has decided to dismiss a case. This could be the focus of subsequent studies.

Without a detailed study, it is difficult to project the attitudes of the media industry, both formal and informal, toward the PCSA. Such a study is recommended. The Media Policy and Democracy Project posited reasonable compliance with the Press Code. They argued that the South African print media are performing well in adhering to the PCSA’s press code articles. The other indicator can be the “effect” of the code on the professional behavior of the practitioners, whether or not it deters unethical patterns and repeated offenses. High figures for repeat offenses by the same publication or of the same article of the press code could be presumed as a lack of regulatory influence.

In general, SANEF recommends that its members adopt the press code and function under the regulatory prescripts of the Press Council. In its submission to the Inquiry into the Media Ethics and Credibility, SANEF lamented the public defamation of journalists by politicians and other journalists without challenging allegedly poor or biased reporting through formal channels such as the press council, press ombud or the Broadcasting Complaints Commission of South Africa. This denies the media industry the opportunity to be reviewed, to defend, and potentially be exonerated by an independent arbiter such as the PCSA. The consequence, according to SANEF, is that the public remains largely in the dark as to what is, in fact, the truth of the allegations and counter-allegations, leading to a general distrust of the media as a whole. Media co-regulation has been significantly undermined by the renunciation of membership of the press council by publications (online and in print) such as those in the Independent Group. SANEF encourages the use of the PCSA as a formal complaint mechanism to promote media credibility. However, our study found that only one per cent of complaints were brought to the PCSA by journalists. SANEF, in general, prefers to use the court system.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).