If you think the story was a tip-off and planted, you're guess is probably correct. Also: I actually like the Mail & Guardian, I respect good publications, but this unsound hogwash deserves the correct facts.
The 3 journalists that spells Cabinet ''c'' with a capital but can't seem to give MultiChoice theirs, create the impression in their convoluted story that MultiChoice gave trips and goodies to politicians to influence South Africa's digital terrestrial television (DTT) regulations.
The sorry story says at the top ''some in the broadcasting industry'' are complaining but don't even quote them anonymously anywhere else - yet later gives the SABC and e.tv's side of the debate of wanting to encrypt the free-to-air DTT signal. Now note that there's not as much as one sentence on M-Net and MultiChoice's side of the argument. Guess who's probably the ''some in the broadcasting industry''...
The Mail & Guardian story then goes into MultiChoice who flew members of parliament's portfolio committee to the CNN/MultiChoice African Journalist of the Year Awards in 2010 and paid for their flights and accomodation.
Full disclosure: I went there too - as did a select press corps chosen and invited by MultiChoice. MultiChoice paid for my flight and accomodation as it did for all delegtes since MultiChoice and CNN are sponsors of this annual event talking about and celebrating journalism. In fact its general knowledge as to whom were invited and attended, as I told it RIGHT HERE more than a year ago.
Keep in mind this is Uganda: Not some tropical idyllic locale everyone was whisked to. People went there for journalism. Journalists and publishers talked about journalism. The hotel's water was luke warm at best. The politicians in fact actually got an ear-full in conference session after conference session on press freedom and journalism. It wasn't a holiday.
Let me tell you: When you sit in a little bus for 2 hours on a journey in packed traffic not moving (press, MultiChoice, politicians and some cockroaches) trying to get to a destination, it's not joy. MultiChoice invited people with an interest in a public event who are also stakeholders for their company, to an event. It wasn't anything more.
I saw and noted how the members of parliament were treated there, I listened very carefully to what they said, what MultiChoice said and where we went. Nobody peddled or influenced anything. And the ''fun'' at the airport arrivals and and departure in which some of the members of parliament were furious because of certain conditional things, I don't think would make them ''favour'' anybody over anybody because of a trip.
It's very important that tabs are kept on possible influence pedding by corporations and companies on the political system, and the press needs to find it and write about it. But this Mail & Guardian really isn't one of those.
Also, you have to wonder why the Mail & Guardian didn't even bother approaching MultiChoice for comment who's never quoted anywhere in the article. Or maybe the Mail & Guardian did, but they then should say they didn't get a comment (and the story doesn't contain that). Psst, Karen Willenberg is actually more M-Net than MultiChoice, and you should maybe get her title right too.
Anyone who reads TV with Thinus regularly will know how hard I am on all of South Africa's broadcasters, TV channels and pay TV operators, daily looking into the tiniest minutiae of any sidesteps and missteps any of them might be making, but also championing what they're getting right. To ''accuse'' MultiChoice in a badly researched and fault-filled story of something that's a non-issue, almost two years old, and simply not true, is just not right.
