*week 13*

 

The final assessment for my News and Media  course, I am required to do a final project. It is separated into 2 parts. for the first part is a film based on Freedom of expression is important in a cosmopolitan society and democracy.

The second part is an essay that draws upon the ideas that we have covered in the course so far to reflect constructively on the film that I have created.

ARTICLE 2: YOUTH AT UKZN TAKE ON THE MEDIA TRIBUNAL

YOUTH AT UKZN TAKE ON THE MEDIA TRIBUNAL

The media tribunal has hit SA youth, and it has hit hard. In our previous article “”A - ZUMA” – we had introduced the three political parties opinion-based responses to the ANC’s media tribunal appeal. The DA, ANCYL and the ANC are the three parties concerned and as ‘journalists’ we are taking a stance specifically on the youth as they are a result of the future - the tomorrows of South Africa. This article deals with matters that could possibly affect our youth. Questions were aimed at the youth to evoke a detailed response on their knowledge of the media tribunal. These questions were posed to interviewees of UKZN: Safee-naaz Siddiqui, Nabeelah Mohammed Haffejee, Masoodah Sheik and Yumnah Cassim.

These questions gave rise to various responses of the youth and they participated intellectually with the curiosity to learn more.

Safee-naaz and Nabeelah have mentioned that they do acknowledge South African politics to a certain extent, but their view on it is that politics in South Africa is different to anywhere else in the world and so are the media and the public, as a whole. According to Safee-naaz and Nabeelah their view on the media exploiting propaganda suggests that the media are vultures who must feed and it is up to the people to be more discerning.

Safee-naaz and Nabeelah both have mentioned in the interview that they know about the media tribunal and their view on the media tribunal is essentially a way of curtailing the press freedom, so that the ruling party has more control over the media freedom. According to them its purpose would be to serve the interest of the elite few instead of reporting to the masses what can 'at times' be considered pertinent information for the interest of the majority. I.T. is a gross violation of public interest and our 'Right to know'.

Along with Safee-naaz and Nabeelah, Yumnah and Masoodah were other respected candidates of the interview. Masoodah informs us that she does not have any interest in S.A. politics because she does not plan on residing here in S.A., although, international media does intrigue her. She undoubtedly says the media is very manipulative and one-sided which discourages a young student such as herself. Yumnah reveals her emotions on her political stance as a young South African by saying she has an interest in politics and is aware of the way in which media exploits propaganda and she finds that political parties are using this form of propaganda to influence the community in believing in what they are saying irrespective of them being positive or negative actions.

Helen Zille said in response to the media tribunal that “the gravest legislative threat to our constitution since 1994...” Safee-naaz says that the greatest threat to the SA Constitution is one that will infringe equality.

Masoodah dictates that as South Africans, seeing her ancestors struggle and strife during the Apartheid era where they fought to claim rights that the people enjoy today and then the government snatches it away from the person that is unjust. Our constitution was much fought for and it is the only constitution that resembles a First World country constitution. By demolishing such a credible constitution, we are stripping the youth and our countries citizens of their right to freedom of expression.

On the other spectrum, Yumnah suggests that the media tribunal appeal by the ANC is made with the intention of protecting mainly political members from harshness of media. It should be a beneficial scheme for all South Africans, not just a particular group – like the political parties of the country.

Lastly, on asking the candidates if they would alter anything about the media freedoms, the general views of Yumnah and Masoodah as representatives of the youth – they concluded that they want openness in the government and wish to know everything about anybody who makes decisive and indecisive conduct. Masoodah further explains that she wouldn’t inhibit the media as such, but rather it is an issue of the citizens needing to know these characters of our rulers of our country and that keeping your public and your citizens informed are the goals of the media, why rob the media of their purpose they serve to the community? - A thought-provoking statement.

In conclusion we can see that these four are representations of the millions of youth across South Africa; some are certainly informed and some not so informed on current issues in S.A. These four candidates can set an example for many other inclined youngsters of the country who wish to be involved and aware of the political state of their homeland - inclined in a way that they are proactive in understanding matters that concern their rights – in this case – the media freedoms and the information bill rights.

Sabah Ismail

Nazia Mahomed

interview with Somayya Khan

1.Personally do you have an interest in politics and the way in which the Media exploits propaganda?

*Yes.I believe that news is not reported ,its created.Mre often then not the masses are exploited by being fed a very biased view in order to protect government intrests.I believe that the media has become an oppressive force and are able to easily sway the views of our countrymen.It has ultimatly become threat and an abrasive force based on falsity rather than a channel via which truth and reality prevails.

2. Do you know what the Media Tribunal entails, if so, what do you think it does entail?

I*t represents a repressive act against the media by the government by regulating what can be reported and what can be constituted a state secret.It purpose would b to serve the intrest of the elite few instead of reporting to the masses what can 'at times' be considerd pertint information for the intrest of the majority.IT is a gross violation of public intrest and our 'Right to know'

3. I have collaborated an article that centres around President Jacob Zuma and how he is recently trying to contradict the constitution freedom of expression rights and I have analysed what 3 parties views are on this dilemma: The ANC, ANCYL and the DA. Helen Zille said in response to the media tribunal that “the gravest legislative threat to our constitution since 1994...” Do you perhaps agree? Please give reason with your answer.

*.Yes I agree.it is indeed an assault on our democracy and will most certainly criminalise investigative journalism.I fully support Zilles stance on this issue.

Interview with Safee-naaz Sidiqqi

* Week 10*

We have been given another article to write this article is similar yet very different to our first article. this article is more about the public views regarding issues relating to media and democracy. how do we go about this?? go into the general public ask them a few questions that my team mate and i have come up with. this article is about 500-700 words all about what the general public opinion is on the matter

Universities...

Universities are the main form of higher learning institutions in the 21^st century; however universities have drastically changed and essentially become what we are accustomed to. Universities throughout history have been a place where individuals have come to learn but the conditions and characteristic of these learning institutions have morphed since its’ conception. Every individual has a different experience at university but the theme of knowledge and self-betterment is something that all students have in common.

My experiences of university life, like the development of universities, has changed drastically. When I first attended university, I was very different but its not hard for me to make friends as i am quite a friendly person . When I became actively involved in academics, I soon found a wide range of individuals that share similar interests and formed bonds. It is ultimately the facilitation of these relationships that allowed my university experience to be enhanced. The memories and experiences that we have shared collectively is something that I will treasure forever and reminisce on in my later life.

 The advancement and development of universities over the past centuries is something that is rather spectacular. It has changed from an institution discriminatory based on gender and religious bias to an institution focused on higher education, equality and social interaction. My experiences at university are different from others, but they are unique moments that I will cherish forever. The universities may have changed along with the students experiences, but their purpose derived from Latin origin will still continue, and that is a collection of teachers and students gathered together on the basis of broadening their knowledge and insight.

Euthanasia

This topic is rather controversial and although there are mainly two opposing views on the matter, however the reasons for believing so are different. The definition for this notion, euthanasia is assisted suicide or murder by the aid of either drugs or the unplugging of any life support mechanisms.

One way of looking at the topic is that assisting a person to die is justified, however it is not enough support to legalise euthanasia. In this it suggests that euthanasia is not morally neutral so therefore it can be assessed as euthanasia is either morally right or wrong which is essentially the purpose of this paper. The main reasons for euthanasia being morally justified are that: the patient’s condition is extreme and cannot outweigh any benefits, pain management is not sufficient, a physician is capable of bringing relief and the patient makes an informed request. The downfall in this argument is that who is a person to decide whether or not the pain can outweigh the benefits? Another issue with this argument is that, can a patient actually make an informed request when he/she is in a position of distress and is this request actually valid? There are however other arguments in support of moral euthanasia, that is where the patient has a rational desire to die, once again the problematic issue with this claim is from a religious point of view in that God has given life so how can one decide to take something that is essentially not theirs to begin with but rather bestowed upon them?

The argument against euthanasia is essentially based on a religious principal, but also draws inspiration from critical engagement. The critical engagement area is mainly challenging the afore mentioned points in favour and is based on the fact that it is difficult in order to determine whether someone has actually given voluntary consent and that they is always a chance that the diagnosis was incorrect which could subsequently mean that there would actually be an unjustified killing. The religious notion is based on one of biblical references that God refrains one from killing so how can he then condone euthanasia. The three main principals is that since everything loves itself, then suicide goes against nature, since every person is part of a community if he commits suicide it will have a negative effect on society and the last point is that God gifted life to man and when one takes that away their life they go against God. The faults in these arguments are that: since not everyone follows a particular religion is it fair that they should they be bound by the same principals? Also that because God had given life to them don’t they deserve to live it the way they want and act in their best interests of avoiding pain?

I am of the opinion that euthanasia is morally unacceptable as in the Quraan God strictly forbids suicide and euthanasia is based on the same principal. Also the fact that God punishes for sin while people are still on earth so in fact this disease could be a test that we must overcome. I am also of the opinion that ones body is entrusted to them and are ordered by God to look after it until they die, naturally. The problem with my view is similar to the one above and that is since not every person is not Muslim they should not be held to the same standard. I suppose that my argument is rather hypocritical in that if I had been put in a position where I was going through a lot of pain, I cannot say that I would not take advantage of euthanasia.