Tarumbiswa Denson Patrick filed a complaint with the MCC over an article published by The Mirror on 11 – 17 February 2016 headlined: ‘Mubobobo debacle – Head seeks peace order’.
The complainant raises the following issues of concern about the article:
· The publication of his name without his permission
· The usage of his photograph without his permission. He also wants to know how The Mirror obtained the photograph.
· He also states that it is not correct that at the time of publication the case had been heard in court as the matter was yet to be heard in the courts
· That the mubobobo issue is not true and questions why his name was therefore falsely published
· That the article has tarnished his reputation as a school teacher, resulting in the loss of his job – he also states that as a result he cannot get a job anywhere
· He also disputes that The Mirror called him for his side of the story, and claims that at the time of publication his phone had been stolen so he was not reachable over the phone
Status: Resolved
The Mirror in its response says its reportage was based on court documents on the case; as well as video evidence which has since been forwarded to the complainant.
The complainant in response:
· Wants to know where The Mirror obtained the video footage from as “there was no reporter on the fateful day”
· Questions how his photos were taken and why his name was used without his consent
· Accuses the newspaper of picking his pictures from the internet without his consent
· Questions the newspaper’s intentions as the newspaper was distributed in “most homes around the said school”.
· Wants clarification on which court papers the newspaper is referring to since he, together with his wife, “… have not yet been summoned to court” over the matter.
· He restates that he has lost his job soon after publication of the article and that this has caused emotional and psychological stress to him
The complainant’s response was brought to the attention of The Mirror for the editor’s consideration.
The Mirror in its response indicated that its reportage of the matter was based on court papers filed by the complainant. The Mirror also restated, that contrary to the complainant’s grievance, one of the newspaper’s reporters spoke to the complainant before publication of the article.
The MCC in its assessment established from the complainant that he had indeed initially instituted court proceedings and that The Mirror’s reportage was therefore based on the relevant court papers. The MCC therefore ruled that this aspect of the complaint falls away.
The Mirror also indicated that pictures of the complainant were obtained from circulating video footage of the altercation between the complainant and parents at the former school he used to head – hence the related aspect of the complaint also falls away.
The MCC in its assessment of the matter is also of the view that there is no demonstrated or insufficient demonstration of the causal link between the publication of the article and the complainant’s loss of his job – hence this aspect of the complaint also falls away.
The matter eventually went for adjudication and both parties attended the hearing. During the hearing the complainant was aggrieved as he stated that his image had been tarnished by the publication of the story and requested an apology from the newspaper. The Mirror in its response indicated that it was not the source but was rather reporting on allegations contained in the court papers– hence the newspaper argued, it could not be held liable for the allegations that are contained in court papers filed by Tarumbiswa.
The MCC was however not able to make a ruling on whether The Mirror indeed did talk to the complainant before publication of the article as the complainant maintained that while his phone was indeed stolen – it was however still active and receiving calls during the period in question.
The MCC therefore ultimately resolved that The Mirror is obliged to follow-up on any developments in the matter in line with Section 12 of the code of conduct and ethics which obliges the media to follow-up on court cases once they have begun reporting on them. The complainants are in turn also obliged to keep the newspaper updated on these developments so that they are reported on.
Recent Comments