Emile Coetzee vs. City Press

SUMMARY

The headline to the column in dispute read, White superiority at any price (published on 28 August 2016; re-published on August 31).

This ruling by Press Ombud Johan Retief was based on the Press Code that was in effect before 30 September 2022.

The column highlighted several examples over the past few months of white people who had been excused for bad behaviour because of the colour of their skin.

Emile Coetzee complained about the question under the Talk to us segment, which read, “Have you witnessed or experienced this kind of behaviour from white people?” He compared this to comments made by racists during apartheid about how “uncivilised” blacks and “poor-whites” were, and added that the newspaper was “assisting” racism in this country.

Retief dismissed the complaint, mainly because:

• as long as people acted as if they were superior to others on the basis of their colour or race, the matter would be in the public domain and worthy of debate – irrespective of the kind of colour or race involved; and
• if the shoe were on the other foot and black people acted as if they were superior, he would have applauded the newspaper for asking the very same question.

THE RULING ITSELF

This ruling is based on the written submissions of Mr Emile Coetzee and those of Dumisane Lubisi, editor of the City Press newspaper.

Coetzee is complaining about a question posed by the newspaper underneath a column on an opinion page of City Press of 28 August 2016 (re-published on August 31) headlined, White superiority at any price.

Complaint

Coetzee complains about the question under the Talk to us segment, which read, “Have you witnessed or experienced this kind of behaviour from white people?”

He says this focus on unacceptable behaviour by white people was “very similar to the comments made by racists during [the] Apartheid era about how ‘uncivilised’ blacks and poor-whites were”, and adds that the newspaper was “assisting” racism in this country.

Coetzee calls this question insulting, uneducated, unprofessional and demeaning, and argues that people, regardless of colour, may behave badly and in a manner depicting superiority. “To place this on one specific racial group is disingenuous in the extreme,” he concludes.

The text

The column, written by Laura Brown, highlighted several examples over the past few months of white people being excused for bad behaviour because of the colour of their skin.

One such example was the Olympic athlete, Ryan Lochte, who admitted that he had lied about being assaulted while in Brazil. Brown argued that he had shown the kind of assumed superiority whites often displayed towards people of other races.

Other examples were about a question asked by a:

·         US citizen as to why it was so complicated to get a visa to visit Columbia (where Brown lives) – asking: “We are coming from America… They should be happy we are here. It’s not like we are coming from some Third World country or something”; and

·         German who was supposed to stand at the back of a long queue at the border between South Africa and Lesotho, who asked while trying to jump this queue: “We’re German, can we join you here in [the front of] the queue?”

City Press responds

Lubisi says the question in dispute was relevant to the content of the column – which comprised a personal reaction to matters in the public domain, with white people acting as if they were better than others.

The editor argues that City Press was justified in asking the question, in that it had been fair and merely captured the content of Brown’s column, adding that no reasonable person should have been offended by Brown using the dominating news of the day with a sprinkle of her own experience regarding racial prejudice added to it.

He adds, “In posing the question below the opinion piece, City Press is inviting readers to share their own experiences on a highly topical debate of undeniable public interest.”

In conclusion, Lubisi says the fact that Coetzee was offended by the newspaper’s question did not by default mean that it was in breach of the Code of Ethics and Conduct. He refers to a ruling by this office in the matter between Mr Sean Cookson against City Press, where I have stated that the matter was part of a robust debate, which should be allowed in an open society such as ours – and he argues that the same applies to this complaint.

Analysis

As long as people act as if they are superior to others on the basis of their colour or race, the matter will be in the public domain and worthy of debate – irrespective of the kind of colour or race involved.

If the shoe were on the other foot and black people acted as if they were superior, I would have applauded the newspaper for asking the very same question: I do not interpret the newspaper’s question as racist or demeaning at all; instead, I commend City Press for publishing Brown’s views and for trying to stimulate the debate, believing that it is in the public interest to flag this issue.

To my mind, the newspaper has done society a service.

Finding

The complaint is dismissed.

Appeal

Our Complaints Procedures lay down that within seven working days of receipt of this decision, either party may apply for leave to appeal to the Chairperson of the SA Press Appeals Panel, Judge Bernard Ngoepe, fully setting out the grounds of appeal. He can be contacted at [email protected].

Johan Retief

Press Ombud