Twits on Twitter usurp real race talk, says Harber

MIRAH LANGER

In fact, Harber told the SA Jewish Report this week that his comments about Eyewitness News journalist Barry Bateman, which sparked the furore, were completely misconstrued.

Harber said he suggested that Bateman, who was recently caught on camera insulting Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema, must be held accountable for his actions. Referring to the reaction to his comments, he said, “It’s rubbish. I’m doing just the opposite. I’m not defending him. What I said, and what I hold by, is that his language and behaviour was unprofessional, and [radio station] 702 was quite right to take him off air and apologise for it immediately.”

Bateman was caught on camera insulting Malema after an interaction with the populist leader at a press conference earlier this month. Bateman was caught on camera calling him a “p**s” in conversation with another journalist.

Following the release of the video in which he made the slur, Bateman was suspended from work, and is now facing an internal investigation.

Harber commented on the situation during an interview with eNCA last week.

A Twitter user called Rhangani then posted, “This white man @AntonHarber on @eNCA, a founding member of @SAEditorsForum, says there was an invasion of Barry Bateman’s privacy. Basically, what he’s saying is that racists should be allowed a safe and private space to be racist.”

Harber responded on the social-media platform, telling Rhangani that he clearly had not listened to the full interview. “Surely you should listen more carefully before attacking someone? This racism tag is thrown around so easily – and dangerously.

“This is a major distortion of what I said,” he posted in another tweet. “On the contrary, I argued that Bateman’s words were inappropriate and unprofessional, and he had to account for them.”

Rhangani then seemed to take a step backward replying, “Maybe I misheard you, but I swear I heard you say ‘invasion of privacy’ or something along those lines.”

Speaking in the aftermath, Harber lamented the dangers of a platform like Twitter in which, “it takes one idiot, who isn’t paying attention, to attack and loosely use allegations of racism without actually establishing what I said”.

He said that his full comment had been that while journalists are entitled to their personal opinion, “you do have to keep in mind that you are a journalist, and there are professional standards for the way you express even private opinions about political figures that you deal with. [Bateman] breached that line.”

Harber said that the subsequent twisting of his comment into an inflammatory attack on Twitter was a worldwide phenomenon on social media.

Yet the particular pity in South Africa was that “there is naturally a particular sensitivity around issues of race”.

“The tragedy is that while there are real issues of race, in this case, somebody ignorantly leaps onto a bandwagon, and quickly makes accusations without thought or knowledge. It’s dangerous and destructive. We really need to respond quickly, and stop that kind of thing.

“We have to have as open and frank an exchange as possible about race, there’s no question about that. But we have to isolate, block, and take on those who do it in a destructive way.”

Marius Roodt, the South African Institute of Race Relations’ head of campaigns, suggested that in fact, these kind of racially-charged incidents led by “keyboard warriors” on Twitter bore little relevance to the reality of life on the ground in South Africa.

“Twitter isn’t real life. I don’t think we should be reporting on what people say on Twitter,” he said.

“Our research has shown that in general, white and black South Africans get on pretty well with each other. About 90% of South Africans say that the various racial groups of South Africa need each other to survive and become a prosperous country.”

In any case, he said, only a tiny fraction – about 5% – of South Africans even use Twitter. “Most South Africans don’t even know what Twitter is, and those that do, don’t care what happens on it.”

University of the Witwatersrand sociology professor Devan Pillay said race remained a “trigger point”.

“Some people exploit it and magnify issues beyond what they need to. It’s a question of finding the correct balance.”

He said the way in which people’s opinions were delegitimised by ascribing them to their race was often a political tactic. “There are moments where who you are has relevance and a degree of bearing on what you say – but it can be overblown.”

Pillay said that on both sides of society, be it the EFF, or those promoting the idea of white genocide, “If you debate with any of them, they immediately point at who you are to delegitimise what you have to say. It’s a dangerous political game that is being played, where you try and delegitimise a voice that you don’t agree with.”

Pillay said that in everyday spaces like the workplace, school, and religious institutes, people in fact interact across racial lines in a much more effective way.

By contrast, social media is a “double-edged sword”. On the one hand it is an informative platform where people can air and share views, on the other there is a “toxicity” to it that is worrying.

“As a friend of mine said, when he stopped using Twitter, he found the world was a much more peaceful place,” quipped Pillay.