Reason 213521 the SABC should be flattened

  Journalism is back from the Christmas break.  And it's as informative and accurate as it was last year.  I suspect this is what it's COO was referring to when he assured everyone that he's the embodiment of leadership at it's best.

It's just a shame that after reading what journalism/leadership dispatched this evening, I have no idea who is making recovery, who spoke to it or who spent three weeks in hospital.

SAFM podcasts fail

21/10/2012 - My recorder failed to record so I can't upload the podcast this week.  We'll try and rectify the problem for next week.

The SABC is defiantly refusing to step into the 21st century.  It's supposed to do all the things that commercial broadcasters either can't or won't do because they're not financially viable.  We then all chip in with the stealth tax commonly known as the TV licence fee and should be getting great programmes for it not the dross that populate the terrestrial channels.  Radio is not much better either.

If you're not a spotty teenager who wants to dance himself to exhaustion, you're out of luck if you don't leave in Gauteng or Western Cape as your only option for talk radio is SAFM.  And I've found it patchy at best.

Was Unathi dismissed or suspended, City Press?

City Press either don't think that the people who read the Entertainment section of their website can distinguish between the words "dismissed" and "suspended" or they just don't care.  According to my dictionary:

Dismiss -

1. Order or allow to leave; send away
2. Discharge from employment or office.

Suspend -

1. Temporarily prevent from continuing or being in force or effect

Why would they have a headline "Unathi dismissed" - which implies that she has been discharged from her duties - and go on to say she has been suspended later on in the same article?  It maybe the work of the subs to make sure the headline and the sub headline are in agreement, but a quick search in their website reveals that the journalist has a history of non stories so it may be par for the course.

Maybe I'm just being a prude and the target market doesn't mind being mislead but in the increasingly squeezed newspaper market that's infested with free writers and where celebrities break their own stories, you'd think paid writers would do better than this.

Sports journalists fail to condemn Pistorius' behaviour

There's no denying that Oscar Pistorius is an amazing sportsman and deserves all the accolades and the adulation he gets.  I can't even begin to imagine what life would be like if I didn't have my limbs.  Yet he and his fellow Olympians are showing us that disabled people can put their bodies through the physical strain and the discipline that is required - just as their able bodied colleagues did a few weeks ago - to produce sporting spectacle that is currently gracing the East End of London.

Having said that, his behaviour in the immediate aftermath of losing the 200m men's race to Brazil's Alan Oliveira was shameful to say the least.  Maybe the guy's legs were longer than he felt appropriate and he should voice his displeasure but that was hardly the place to do it.  My suspicions that even he knew that were confirmed this morning when he issued an apology for the timing of his outburst.  But what is shocking is the sheer lack of condemnation for his antics.  I don't watch TV, listen to the radio or read tree murdering newspapers on magazines but I read newspapers online and none of them have criticised him.  I follow a couple of sports reporters on twitter, some of whom are currently covering the Paralympics in London, and I have yet to hear a dissenting word about Pistorius.  The only mildly critical tweet that came into my timeline was from a journalist bemoaning being snubbed for an interview:

Oscar Pistorius snubs both SABC & Supersport @ the stadium last night but speaks to international media.So much for a Proudly South African!
— Velile Mbuli (@Veli_Mbuli) September 3, 2012

I wonder why that is Veli.  Maybe he wanted to deal with real journalists first and maybe talk to brown nosers afterwards, if he feels like it.  He can afford to do this safe in the knowledge that he can do no wrong in your eyes.  That's my understanding of that Proudly South African nonsense.

If he was an able bodied athlete, there'd be no end of people lining up to (excuse the pun) stick the boot in.  The only reason he's treated with kid's gloves by the media is because he's disabled.  This goes against the doctrine that disabled people should be treated the same way as everyone else.  This, unfortunately, involves rebuking them when they do wrong.  Pretending otherwise is to do everyone a disservice and very patronising.

Even Oscar would agree with that.  I wouldn't hold my breath for it, because nobody will put it to him.

UPDATE:  05/09/2012:  If you interested in the science of the technology involved, Dr Ross Tucker elaborates here