Title: New Terrains of Privacy in South Africa: Biometrics/Smart Identification Systems, CCTV/ALPR, Drones, Mandatory SIM Card Registration and Fica
Author: Dr Dale T. McKinley
15 December 2016
Privacy issues in South Africa have a particular historical significance, given the apartheid state’s systemic violation of the privacy of the black majority and political dissidents in general. A significant part of the struggle to defeat apartheid, to reclaim the human dignity of the oppressed, was the battle to regain both individual and collective privacy. South Africa’s new democratic constitution unequivocally broke from that history by laying down a range of civil and political rights, including the right to privacy. But there has been a consistent failure to match legislative intent with practical implementation and enforcement, as well as an embrace of a range of policies, practices and technologies that have put privacy in the back seat.
This monograph, produced as part of a collaborative research project between the Right2Know Campaign and the Media Policy & Democracy Project, attempts to scope some of the new terrains for privacy in South Africa.
These include:
It is hoped that this initial effort will provide a good foundation for further research and advocacy.
Download the full PDF version of this report here:
Author: Dr Dale T. McKinley
15 December 2016
Privacy issues in South Africa have a particular historical significance, given the apartheid state’s systemic violation of the privacy of the black majority and political dissidents in general. A significant part of the struggle to defeat apartheid, to reclaim the human dignity of the oppressed, was the battle to regain both individual and collective privacy. South Africa’s new democratic constitution unequivocally broke from that history by laying down a range of civil and political rights, including the right to privacy. But there has been a consistent failure to match legislative intent with practical implementation and enforcement, as well as an embrace of a range of policies, practices and technologies that have put privacy in the back seat.
This monograph, produced as part of a collaborative research project between the Right2Know Campaign and the Media Policy & Democracy Project, attempts to scope some of the new terrains for privacy in South Africa.
These include:
- The roll out of biometric databases and smart identification systems, with specific focus on the social security and population management systems;
- The massive increase in CCTV/ALPR hardware and software, along with surveillance in both public and private owned (public) spaces;
- The rapid rise in the use of drones for private use and commercial application;
- The collection, storage, ‘sharing’ and commodification of ever increasing amounts of personal information by both public and private sector entities in specific relation to SIM card registration and FICA.
It is hoped that this initial effort will provide a good foundation for further research and advocacy.
Download the full PDF version of this report here:
| r2kmpdp_new_terrains_of_privacy_in_south__africa_masterset_small.pdf |
Title: Press regulation in South Africa: an analysis of the Press Council of South Africa, the Press Freedom Commission and related discourses
Authors: Dr Julie Reid & Taryn Isaacs
27 November 2015
A national conversation on the effectiveness and functionality of the accountability mechanism for the press in South Africa initiated in 2007, reignited in 2010 and has sporadically continued until the current time in 2015. At various times and on various platforms, different engagers in this debate have posed several different questions about the functionality of the Press Council system, its efficacy and its appropriateness for South Africa. Little of this discourse is however, based on empirical and/or scientific evidence, study or fact. Most of it is based on estimation, sometimes political interest, personal motivations, conjecture or even myth. As such, the Media Policy & Democracy Project collated a list of commonly posed key questions, and developed a set of research categories in order to investigate each, so that each key question could be measured, with regard to its validity or invalidity, against fact and statistical analysis. This report involves a detailed assessment of the performance of the Press Council of South Africa over a five year period, a critical analysis of the outcomes of the Press Freedom Commission, and explains the relevance of these findings to the related political discourses surrounding press regulation in South Africa.
For more information or comment about this report, contact Dr Julie Reid: reidjbj@unisa.ac.za
Download the full PDF version of this report, including all appendices here:
| mpdp_pcsa_pfc_report2015.pdf |
Title: Considering a cross-platform media accountability system for broadcast, print and digital news media in South Africa
Authors: Dr Julie Reid & Taryn Isaacs
February 2015
In December 2014 the MPDP was approached by the Director of the Press Council of South Africa, and by the multi-stakeholder committee investigating cross-platform media accountability systems for South Africa, and requested to produce an assessment of cross-platform media regulatory systems from around the globe with a view to whether such a system would be appropriate for South Africa. This report offers a comparative assessment of cross-platform models adopted in a selection of foreign countries, as well as a critical interrogation of local and contextual aspects which would impact the regulation of print and digital news media under one singular regulatory body in South Africa.
Download the full PDF version of this report here:
Authors: Dr Julie Reid & Taryn Isaacs
February 2015
In December 2014 the MPDP was approached by the Director of the Press Council of South Africa, and by the multi-stakeholder committee investigating cross-platform media accountability systems for South Africa, and requested to produce an assessment of cross-platform media regulatory systems from around the globe with a view to whether such a system would be appropriate for South Africa. This report offers a comparative assessment of cross-platform models adopted in a selection of foreign countries, as well as a critical interrogation of local and contextual aspects which would impact the regulation of print and digital news media under one singular regulatory body in South Africa.
Download the full PDF version of this report here:
| mpdp_considering_a_cpmas_for_south_africa.pdf |
OLDER REPORTS:
Title: 'Nkandlagate' - a critical textual analysis of the press coverage
Author: Prof Jeanne Prinsloo
21 January 2013
About this report:
WHY A NKANDLA REPORT? This research report involves a critical discourse analysis of the press coverage of the Nkandla story by the City Press and the Mail & Guardian between September 2012 and September 2013 (1 calendar year). The Media Policy and Democracy Project is compelled by a concern to contribute to media and communications policy making and development. This report considers how the positions of two of the main stakeholders in South African media policymaking, the ANC and the media, differ from one another, often resulting in confrontation.
What does this report do? This report tests the main arguments contained within the discourses of the ANC and the media, against one another through performing a case study analysis of one of the biggest news stories of the past two years.
Why was the coverage of the Nkandla story selected for the case study? The news media coverage of the President’s private home at Nkandla was selected as the case study for this report because it involves the ANC and more particularly the leader of the ANC party, was produced by investigative journalism, has raised questions of whether a political figure’s dignity and privacy have been infringed by the media and has similarly raised concerns for media freedom in South Africa, including questions surrounding the difficulty of open access to information.
Why were the City Press and the Mail & Guardian newspapers selected for the case study? These two newspapers not only initiated the story by being the first to publish news on the spending of public funds on the President’s private home at Nkandla, but they have since consistently produced a bulk of investigative follow-up stories as well as editorial analysis on the matter.
Why is this report important now? Although this report analyses press coverage for one calendar year from September 2012 to September 2013, the findings of the report have become all the more relevant at the present time, since the ‘Nkandlagate’ scandal presently continues. The main findings of this report, summarised below, are still relevant to the ongoing stand-off between the major players in the Nkandla scandal. For example, in recent weeks the ministers of security and of the police have requested the media to desist from publishing pictures of Nkandla citing security concerns, yet ignoring the implications of the request on media freedom. The Mail & Guardian’s publication of the findings of the leaked Public Protector’s provisional report initiated an immediate scramble by security cluster officials and others to prevent similar leaks. ‘Nkandlagate’ is far from over.
Click below to download the full research report and the summary of the findings.
| mpdp_nkandla_report_summary_of_findings_jan_2014.pdf |
| mpdp_exec_summary_of_nkandla_report_jan_2014.pdf |
| mpdp_nkandla_research_report_21jan_2014.pdf |
Professor Jeanne Prinsloo is a professor affiliated to the School of Journalism and Media Studies at Rhodes University, where she teaches graduate students for part of the year. Based in Durban, she is also an independent teacher and researcher and has published widely on media, gender, texts and identities.
To read her news article on this report, published on the Daily Maverick, click here.
To read her news article on this report, published on the Daily Maverick, click here.