INDEPENDENT Media has been outspoken for years on the need to keep the media a sacred place where diverse opinion can be shared. As the largest print media house in South Africa with one of the broadest audience groups, Independent Media has championed media freedom.
Yet, media freedom is never a given as it is constantly under threat – not just from the government as it was in the past, but increasingly, from business seeking to secure their share of voice to influence readers, listeners, and viewers.
We’re not talking advertising or marketing tactics here either. Rather, the fact that the banks, for example, seem to own significant swathes of the South African media – except for Independent Media – and can therefore have some sway over how to get their points across.
Given they control the purse strings on corporate South Africa, have a combined asset base several times bigger than the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) and have the autonomy, it appears, to fire clients as and when they like and for no reason at all, it’s not a stretch to think that there is too much power in these institutions.
Certainly, this seems to be the case in the United Kingdom (UK) too, where the furore and fallout over the closure of former politician Nigel Farage’s bank account, and the subsequent refusal by 10 banks to open an account for him, is gaining momentum.
The chief executive of NatWest Bank, who owns Coutts Private Bank where Farage had his account, has also stepped down, given her breach of confidentiality in sharing Farage’s personal information with the UK’s BBC.
Farage was denied his banking facilities as his political views did not match those of the bank itself, although Dame Alison Rose appears to have informed the media that his account was closed because it was not commercially viable for the bank.
Independent Media is also in the midst of a battle for its right to retain its bank accounts, with South Africa’s big transactional banks putting the squeeze on the publishing group, as well as its distant relations linked to the Sekunjalo Group.
Just like Farage, several banks have refused to do business with any of these companies.
Claiming “reputational risk” seems to ring hollow against the backdrop of what the banks as shareholders in Independent Media’s competitors have to gain. Could this be a simple case of business cents to close Independent Media by preventing them from trading so they can divide the spoils between them?
The whimsical termination of banking accounts has also alarmed the UK government, prompting the UK Treasury minister Andrew Griffith, to meet 19 bank bosses for a summit earlier this week, to discuss concerns that were being raised by many people over being denied access to banking due to their politics or perceived beliefs.
Mr Griffith said afterwards: “It’s not the job of banks to tell us what to think, or what political party we should support. The government’s been extremely clear on this, in a democracy that relies upon freedom of expression … that is not a legitimate thing for a bank to remove someone's access to a bank account.”
This is a lesson that South African banks need to learn – and quickly – and the public needs to be aware of.
A democracy is founded on the trust of its right to media freedom, that should never be held to ransom by the banking sector.