Ruling by the Press Ombudsman
3 September 2014
This ruling is based on the written submissions of Ms Zenith Mia, director of Rare Breed Entertainment, and those of Makhosazana Zwane-Siguqa, editor of Drum magazine.
Complaint
Mia is complaining about a story published in Drum on 26 June 2014, with a front-page headline reading Scandal: Jub Jub’s sex partner revealed. The story itself was published on pages 8 and 9, headlined Prison loverboy. (The text has been reprinted and circulated on the internet sites Times Live, Zalebs, iafrica and The Juice.)
She complains that the:
She adds that the allegations have unnecessarily harmed her reputation and dignity.
The text
The story, written by Ntombizodwa Makhoba, said that Molemo “Jub Jub” Maaronhanye (who was serving a 25-year sentence for murder, attempted murder, driving under the influence of drugs and racing on a public road) “was caught having sex with a female visitor” at the prison. Makhoba wrote: “It is rumoured that a tall, light-skinned brunette fitting [Mia’s] description was seen sneaking into [the prison] in a prison warder uniform… Later she was caught having sex with Jub Jub.” Makhoba wrote that Jub Jub was transferred to Johannesburg Prison immediately after this incident.
Analysis
Mia says she can state under oath that on May 5, she:
She complains that the unfounded and uncorroborated rumours and allegations naming her as “the woman who had sex in prison” have adversely affected her family, her work and her social and religious life.
Drum replies that Mia was seen at Jub Jub’s trial on several occasions and was a convicted drug smuggler. “We were alerted to the fact that she had served four year(s) in prison in Japan for drug smuggling.”
The editor says that Drum had three sources (two inmates and a Correctional Services official) who all substantiated the information. In addition, the magazine spoke to a friend who was close to both Mia and Jub Jub, as well as to his former girlfriend. She adds that Mia has “always” been associated with Jub Jub.
Zwane-Siguqa also states that:
The editor concludes that it was reasonable for the magazine to believe that the story was true.
My considerations
Having been alerted to the fact that the Department was on the verge of completing its investigation into the alleged incident, I decided to wait for the outcome before making a decision.
After the investigation had been completed, the Department informed me that it would not release the outcome, but it did indicate that it would respond to questions.
So, I asked them:
The response to all the questions was “no” – which leads me to accept that the allegations were false.
I have noted that, while the article sporadically mentioned that the statements in dispute were allegations and while these had been ascribed to sources, the overall impression created was that the allegations were in fact correct. This observation is substantiated by the bulk of the story, as well as by the headlines.
Even if Drum did attempt to contact Mia, and had reason to believe its sources (rightly or wrongly), it was not at liberty to portray these damning allegations as fact. Also, the Press Code requires from publications that, if comment cannot be obtained from the subject of critical reporting, the article should state this (which it did not do).
Drum’s arguments that the journalist spoke to Mia at court, that she was a convicted drug smuggler, that she did not deny at the time that she was the one who had been “caught” with Jub Jub in prison, and that she “fitted the description given to Drum by three sources”, are so weak that no counter-arguments are required.
I therefore conclude that the article unnecessarily tarnished Mia’s reputation and dignity, and that the article has caused her serious and unnecessary harm – which necessitates a proper and prominent sanction.
Finding
Drum is in breach of the following sections of the Press Code:
Sanction
Drum is directed to:
If the article in dispute was or is published on Drum’s website, the same apology should be published on that medium, and the original story should be removed from the site.
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 Adjudication Panel, Judge Bernard Ngoepe, fully setting out the grounds of appeal. He can be contacted at Khanyim@ombudsman.org.za.
Johan Retief
Press Ombudsman