Talk:Media of South Africa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject South Africa (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Africa (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Cited by the Mail & Guardian online: Can you trust Wikipedia?, Elvira van Noort, Johannesburg, South Africa, 07 November 2005 09:13, as an article needing improvement.

[C]learly a first, very loose shot at the subject.
Having said that, the entry is both inaccurate and inadequate. Inaccuracies include the statement that the South African Broadcasting Corporation is licence-funded. Inadequacies are rife: it does not even mention radio, our biggest medium; it ignores newspapers not in English or Afrikaans; it says some papers criticised apartheid, but does not mention the censorship we had.
-- Anton Harber, professor of journalism and media studies at the University of the Witwatersrand

"The South African Media is free and flourishing"[edit]

To say that the "South African Media is free and flourishing" is pretty POV. Three or four media firms effectively have an oligopoly over the press.There may be 19 daily newspapers, but they're almost all controlled by 3 or 4 outlets. There is a strong argument that these firms generally put out a pretty biased pro-Corporate message. Likewise, the state broadcaster is argued by many to carry a fairly strong pro-ruling party bias (there is a lot to consider here, including the make-up of the SABC management and exec staff). Also, to say that "the press is currently free to talk about any subject without censorship" at the very least ignores the complexity of the situation -- take the recent Oilgate controversy [1]

The info on this page is currently pretty POV and paints a rosy picture where, in actual fact, the situation is a lot more complex and, often, quite bleak... Really consider revising

Well, anybody can edit Wikipedia ... I'm a bit disappointed that you didn't revise it yourself. Elf-friend 12:47, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Great work guys (and girls)![edit]

See http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?articleid=256607&area=/insight/insight__national/ - Ta bu shi da yu 03:25, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Congrats are due to User:Elf-friend - even got a mention in M&G ! Can we take the Cleanup tag off - I think most of the concerns have been addressed ? Wizzy 21:40, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Freedom of the media is under attack in South Africa[edit]

http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/Politics/0,,2-7-12_2012490,00.html SABC blacklist certain reporters critical of the Government.

Afrikaans Newspaper (RAPPORT) have a main article dealing stating that the SABC is being controlled by the ruling ANC Government in South Africa. http://www.news24.com/Rapport/Hoofartikels/0,,752-800_2013532,00.html According to the Article, Dr. Snuki Zikalala, chief of SABC-news, is controlling the content of the news, and he is a ANC functionary. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NdlovuX (talkcontribs) 03:53, October 15, 2006 (UTC).

NdlovuX, please don't shout (I've de-capitalised the section heading you started). Feel free to add this information yourself, if you can do it in a neutral and encyclopedic manner. Since you have found the references this should not be a problem. However, as I've mentioned before on other talk pages, Wikipedia is a tertiary source, which means we report on what others say, but do not repeat or condone/condemn their viewpoints. Also, you've been on Wikipedia long enough by now to know that it's courtesy to sign your comments Zunaid 18:21, 15 October 2006 (UTC)