Media coverage

15 JUNE 2011

An apology to Coal of Africa (CoAL)

Source: www.beeld.com

Coal of Africa (CoAL) has lodged a complaint with the national Press Ombudsman regarding a story that was published in Beeld on 4 January this year with the headline “Rivier glo onder grond raak geboor - Vrees dat vars water en soutwater al gemeng het”(‘Underground river said to be drilled open - Fears of already merged fresh water and salt water’).

The story, which was written by Elise Tempelhoff, reports that drilling by CoAL at a coal mine in an ecologically sensitive area on the northern slope of the Soutpansberg allegedly struck an underground river and opened it up, and that this could lead to an ecological disaster.

The Deputy Press Ombudsman, Johan Retief, held a hearing on 7 June. He was assisted by two members of the Press Council Panel, Peter Mann and Ethel Manyaka.

The panel found that Tempelhoff had breached the Press Code by publishing serious allegations against CoAL without first obtaining the company’s commentary and independently verifying the allegations.

The allegations include that CoAL had drilled into an underground river and opened it up; that as a result, fresh and salt water could have “merged”- which could have resulted in an ecological disaster; that underground rivers in the area feed the Nzhelele Dam; that the company is in fact mining at Makhado; and that the Minister of Mining had approved the “mine”.

Tempelhoff also neglected to publish CoAL’s denial that it is mining at Makhado.

In so doing, she broke a basic journalistic rule by not listening to and reporting both sides of the story.

The panel also noticed several inaccuracies in the story, such as that:

  • CoAL mined at Makhado, whereas the company was only prospecting with a view to possible eventual mining activities;
  • CoAL didn’t have a water licence for its “mine”; and
  • Mr John Wallington of CoAL had said that Ms Susan Shabangu, the Mining Minister, had approved the Makhado “mine”.

Tempelhoff also neglected to mention that CoAL had satisfied the minimum requirements regarding its public participation process.

In addition to not approaching CoAL for its view and independantly verifying the allegations, she also based her story on a single primary, anonymous source - a seriously dangerous journalistic practice.

A complaint regarding the words “eksperimentele fase”(‘experimental phase’) and “algemene goedkeuring”(‘general approval’) and the fact that she should have named her source(s) was turned down.

Beeld hereby offers its apology for any damage that it has needlessly caused CoAL.

Visit www.presscouncil.org.za (rulings, 2011) for the full finding.