Independent Media and the true meaning of press freedom
Independent Media's editor-in-chief Adri Senekal de Wet.
Image: Armand Hough/Independent Newspapers
CAROLINE James's recent article on amaBhungane's decision to intervene in a legal matter involving Independent Media is a disingenuous attempt to paint herself and her organisation as champions of press freedom.
However, it is both ironic and revealing that this apparent act of 'solidarity' arrives wrapped in disdain, accusations, and a backhanded swipe at Dr Iqbal Survé, the chairman of Independent Media and the Sekunjalo Group.
Let me set the record straight. Dr Survé is a visionary South African entrepreneur, a trained medical doctor, and a global philanthropist who has received multiple honorary doctorates and has served in key leadership roles across international economic and media platforms. He has served as chairperson of the BRICS Business Council (South Africa), represented the country at the World Economic Forum in Davos, and remains deeply committed to building inclusive economic models that empower the majority of South Africans, not a select few.
Crucially, Dr Survé has dedicated a significant portion of his life to defending and advancing the principles of free speech and media plurality, often at great personal and financial cost. Under his leadership, Independent Media became one of the very few large-scale, black-owned media houses in the country, committed to transforming the narrative landscape of South Africa. It is precisely because of this transformation that powerful interest groups have waged a relentless campaign to discredit him and the company he leads.
Independent Media has published stories other outlets wouldn't touch — stories about state capture, corporate corruption, banking collusion, land restitution failures, and political hypocrisy. We have given voice to the marginalised, to families of unrest victims, whistleblowers, and ordinary citizens. We have upheld the spirit and substance of media freedom as enshrined in Section 16 of our Constitution: not just the right to speak, but the right to know.
Which brings us to the real meaning of World Press Freedom Day, a day meant to honour the fundamental human right to free expression and to recognise the press as a pillar of democracy, not a tool of elite manipulation. Sadly, this spirit is being diluted by actors like amaBhungane, who present themselves as independent while evading full transparency about their funding and motives.
James fails to mention, for instance, the growing concern about amaBhungane's financial ties to international donors and wealthy local benefactors, including links to Oppenheimer-aligned initiatives. She does not disclose that figures like William Gumede allegedly received funding from these circles, raising serious questions about ownership influence and editorial bias. For an organisation that preaches transparency, this omission is glaring.
It is also worth reminding the public that one of amaBhungane's co-founders, Sam Sole, has previously been accused of Stratcom-style tactics, misusing investigative journalism to serve political interests and destabilise black-owned media entities. These are not idle accusations. They come from years of observation, experience, and first-hand exposure to how narrative warfare is conducted in South Africa.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
In that context, James's faux indignation that Independent Media has called out amaBhungane as 'racist' or 'Stratcom' is not only misplaced, it's revealing. It reflects a belief that their organisation is beyond scrutiny, above criticism, and immune to being held to the same standards they so eagerly apply to others.
Let us be crystal clear: press freedom does not belong to a handful of NGOs funded from abroad. It belongs to the people of South Africa. It belongs to the journalists on the ground, the community papers, the investigative reporters who work without donor stipends or overseas backers. And yes, it belongs to media houses like Independent, which face daily legal and financial harassment for simply doing their job.
The case involving ARTsolar is not an isolated incident; it is part of a broader trend where powerful interests use the courts to silence journalists. We reject any form of censorship, whether it comes from corporate boardrooms or courtrooms. But we also reject opportunists who swoop in at the last minute to frame themselves as heroes while undermining the very institutions they claim to defend.
At Independent Media, we are committed to protecting the rights of our journalists, defending the integrity of our platforms, and ensuring that media freedom is not reduced to a slogan used to justify elitist capture of the narrative. We are here to serve the public interest. That includes challenging the very actors who claim to speak for the public while operating in secret.
We call on amaBhungane to disclose all their sources of funding, all potential conflicts of interest, and the real motivations behind their targeted interventions. We also remind them that media solidarity begins with mutual respect, not condescension, not character assassination, and certainly not selective advocacy.
As editor-in-chief, I am proud to stand alongside Dr Survé and the editors and journalists across our titles. We are not perfect, but we are principled. And we will continue to tell the stories that matter, no matter how uncomfortable they are for those who believe they should control the narrative. On this Press Freedom Day, let us reaffirm what real media independence looks like: it looks like accountability, it looks like truth-telling, and it looks like ownership that reflects the soul of the country, not the wallets of a privileged few.
* Adri Senekal de Wet is the editor-in-chief of Independent Media.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
24 minutes ago
- IOL News
‘You call this leadership?': DA's Liam Jacobs grills SAFA president Danny Jordaan over travel expenses
Democratic Alliance's (DA) member of the portfolio committee on Department of Sports, Arts and Culture, has grilled SAFA president Danny Jordaan on whether he is a responsible leader, over costly travel expenses. Image: Facebook/Liam Jacobs Democratic Alliance (DA) MP and member of the portfolio committee on Sports, Arts and Culture, Liam Jacobs, who's known for his tough line of questioning, grilled SAFA President Danny Jordaan over his leadership and travel expenses. The clash occurred during a briefing on SAFA's 2023/24 annual report, which included audited financial statements and governance issues. Jacobs began his questioning by asking Jordaan, 'Do you believe in the concept of democracy? Can you please put your microphone on when you respond?' Jordaan replied, 'I'm a product of a struggle for democracy...' Jacobs continued, asking whether Jordaan respected the concept of democracy and if he understood the importance of term limits. Jordaan, who appeared caught off guard, said, 'You're asking me a question that is self-evident,' He added, 'I understand it. I was here as a member of Parliament.' Jacobs then pressed Jordaan on his long tenure as SAFA president. 'Are you aware that you are one of the longest-serving presidents of any football association on the planet?' Jordaan responded, 'It's not true,' prompting Jacobs to fire back, 'Twelve years, almost...' As tensions rose, Jordaan interjected, 'I'm still busy with my interrogation here... They must ask the questions and answer. Just order. Now he's engaging me now.' Committee Chairperson Joe McGluva intervened, urging members to allow questions to be asked and responses to follow in an orderly manner. Fellow committee member PA Marlon Daniels objected to Jacobs' conduct, particularly pointing his finger at Jordaan. 'What I witnessed here is not right. It is absolutely rude for a child to have that kind of conduct toward someone old enough to be his father,' Daniels said. McGluva then asked Jacobs to apologise for the gesture if it had occurred. 'I apologise for that,' Jacobs said. Daniels also withdrew the remark calling Jacobs a 'child.' 'I'm terribly sorry. I forgot I'm not at home where I deal with my children like that. So I withdrew...' Meanwhile, Jacobs continued with his line of questioning. 'Do you consider yourself a responsible leader?' Jordaan initially appeared hesitant but ultimately responded, 'The response was yes, Honourable Jacobs.' Jacobs then raised concerns over Jordaan's travel expenses, saying, 'In my hands, as I sit here, I have got something I know you don't think I have.' He mentioned trips, including a R131,000 trip to Ivory Coast and London, two visits to Qatar costing R56,000 and R31,000, and a trip to Vietnam for the Oceania Congress from September 29 to October 3, 2023.' 'What are we as South Africans doing in Vietnam at an Oceania Congress of an organisation that only has 13 members thousands of kilometres away?' Jacobs asked. He also mentioned trips to Cameroon for R105,574 and Morocco for R82,833, questioning the value of such spending amid SAFA's financial strain. However, Jordaan defended the Vietnam trip, saying it was related to South Africa's bid to host the FIFA Women's World Cup. 'You may know, or you may not know, that South Africa made a bid for hosting the Women's World Cup. The CEO was with me. Tumi Tlamini was with me,' Jordaan said. 'Do you have their costs there? Do you have their flight tickets there? This is a campaign.'
The South African
36 minutes ago
- The South African
'20% of Afrikaners have left SA' - Here's why...
More Afrikaners are choosing to leave South Africa and seek refugee status in the US. According to the Solidarity Movement, the migration of white South Africans has been an ongoing occurrence over a lack of employment opportunities. Last week, a second batch of the minority group left the country under the resettlement plan. Thousands more are expected to follow them. According to Solidarity Movement spokesperson Jaco Kleynhans, up to 8 000 white Afrikaners will take up refugee status in the US over the coming weeks. However, thousands more have left before them. He posted on his X account: '20% of Afrikaners have already left the country permanently or temporarily because they could not find work here. The white unemployment rate is completely skewed. 'Hundreds of thousands of Afrikaners have been pushed out of the formal labor market and have started their own businesses or emigrated. Like Kleynhans, many white South Africans believe 'race laws' harm their chances of employment. Jaco Kleynhans's claims about the white population – which includes Afrikaners – fall in line with statistics. According to a 2022 census, white South Africans made up 7.3% of the total population, which is about 4.5 million people. Of that, around 3 million are Afrikaners. Over the years, reports indicate the following decline in the white population 2011 – 9% 2016 – 8,1 % 2021 – 7,8 % Although stats reveal a dip in unemployment, the Commission for Employment Equity noted that white people still occupy 62,1% of top management level posts while Black people occupied 13.8% According to many recruitment agencies, many Afrikaners immigrate to other countries for farm work opportunities abroad. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 . Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp , Facebook , X, and Bluesky for the latest news.
IOL News
41 minutes ago
- IOL News
Dr John Hlophe challenges court ruling on JSC participation
MK Party Deputy President Dr John Hlophe says he will appeal against the Western Cape High Court ruling that barred him from serving in the Judicial Service Commission. Image: Armand Hough / Independent Newspapers Impeached former Western Cape judge president and MK Party caucus leader in Parliament, Dr John Hlophe, has vowed to appeal the Western Cape High Court, which barred him from representing his party in the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). Reacting to the decision during the party's media briefing on Tuesday, Hlophe in isiZulu, said 'Ngeke sidlale amajaji la sizodlulisa isinqumo (We are going to appeal the decision).' On Monday, the court set aside a decision by the National Assembly (NA) made in July last year to endorse the recommendation of the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party to have him serve as one of its six parliamentarians. The party had nominated Hlophe to serve on the JSC, which empowered him to participate in the appointment of judges. The JSC was due to conduct interviews for the vacant positions of judges, however, the DA, Freedom Under Law, and Corruption Watch filed an urgent interdict to prevent Hlophe from sitting in the interviews. The court granted an interdict. The matter was heard in February by a full bench of judges from outside the division, after the court previously granted an interdict in favour of the Democratic Alliance, Freedom Under Law, and Corruption Watch, preventing Hlophe from participating in the work of the commission pending this matter. The court said the NA had fundamentally misunderstood the nature of its powers to designate members to serve on the body that interviews candidates to become judges. It added that this seriously threatens the independence of the judiciary and his presence on the JSC would prejudice the commission's ability to do its work. 'Through the impeachment of Dr Hlophe, the National Assembly has effectively already determined that his continued involvement in judicial affairs would diminish public trust,' said the court. It said that by Hlophe trying to appeal this judgment in the first part of this case, he has shown disregard for the authority and integrity of the courts. For this reason, it made an order that a judge removed for gross misconduct may never serve on the JSC. In 2021, the Judicial Conduct Tribunal (JCT) found that Hlophe's conduct breached the provisions of Section 165 of the Constitution and his conduct threatened and interfered with the independence, impartiality of the Constitutional Court. Acting on the recommendations of the JCT, the JSC found Hlophe guilty of attempting to influence two justices of the Constitutional Court to violate their oaths of office to rule in favour of former Jacob Zuma in his arms deal case in 2008. The matter was then referred to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services, which then recommended to the National Assembly to impeach Hlophe. This was eventually approved by Parliament through a vote last year. This meant that Hlophe was stripped of his lifetime title as a judge as well as other perks including lifetime salary. [email protected]
