Press Ombudsman rules against Brink
Press Ombudsman of SA:
Ruling: AR Brink vs. Mail & Guardian
The complainant [AR Brink] objected to two principal elements in the article (M&G, 7 October): That he had criticised female AIDS reporters in a manner that demonstrated he was mentally unwell; and that the allegation that his employer had intimidated journalists working for Health-e carried the implication that he had done the intimidating.
The first element refers to the headline ‘Brink’s loony tilt at journos”. I agree with the Mail and Guardian’s contention that the headline does not describe Brink as loony, only his criticism of the women journalists.
A public figure who involves himself in controversial matters must expect to receive criticism as sharp as that which he delivers. In this case, Brink has attacked the Mail and Guardian, its editor and past and present female staff in terms which justify the riposte.
The second element he objects to rests apparently on a statement by Kerry Cullinan that “I don’t like the Rath Foundation intimidating people who write what they don’t like” and a sentence stating that the SA National Editors’ Forum is investigating a complaint that the Rath Foundation is intimidating Health-e journalists.
Brink says no factual foundation exists for such a charge and adds: “The closest to this was my legitimate threat, before which Health Systems Trust [Health-e’s host organisation] rightly quailed, to seek full legal recompense from anyone who defames me–which is to say, unlawfully invades my rights”. Brink contends that cannot count as intimidation.
Brink’s statement that he had issued a threat “before which Health Systems Trust rightly quailed” neatly fits a dictionary definition of intimidation. Chambers’ definition of intimidate reads as follows: to strike fear into; to influence by threats or violence.
Intimidation: the use of violence or threats to influence the conduct or compel the consent of another.
If intimidation is intended to achieve an objective contrary to a provision in the Bill of Rights, in this case freedom of expression, then it must be asked whether it can be called legitimate.
The HIV/AIDS debate continues to rage and it is in the public interest that the protagonists on either side should be allowed to express their opinions in accordance with the SA Constitution.
The press code says a publication is justified in strongly advocating its own views on controversial topics; therefore its taking sides in the HIV/AIDS controversy is not a breach of the press code.
The complaints by Mr Brink cannot be upheld.
E H Linington Press Ombudsman 21 October 2005
Author
-
Health-e News is South Africa's dedicated health news service and home to OurHealth citizen journalism. Follow us on Twitter @HealtheNews
View all posts
Republish this article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Unless otherwise noted, you can republish our articles for free under a Creative Commons license. Here’s what you need to know:
-
You have to credit Health-e News. In the byline, we prefer “Author Name, Publication.” At the top of the text of your story, include a line that reads: “This story was originally published by Health-e News.” You must link the word “Health-e News” to the original URL of the story.
-
You must include all of the links from our story, including our newsletter sign up link.
-
If you use canonical metadata, please use the Health-e News URL. For more information about canonical metadata, click here.
-
You can’t edit our material, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. (For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week”)
-
You have no rights to sell, license, syndicate, or otherwise represent yourself as the authorized owner of our material to any third parties. This means that you cannot actively publish or submit our work for syndication to third party platforms or apps like Apple News or Google News. Health-e News understands that publishers cannot fully control when certain third parties automatically summarise or crawl content from publishers’ own sites.
-
You can’t republish our material wholesale, or automatically; you need to select stories to be republished individually.
-
If you share republished stories on social media, we’d appreciate being tagged in your posts. You can find us on Twitter @HealthENews, Instagram @healthenews, and Facebook Health-e News Service.
You can grab HTML code for our stories easily. Click on the Creative Commons logo on our stories. You’ll find it with the other share buttons.
If you have any other questions, contact info@health-e.org.za.
Press Ombudsman rules against Brink
by Health-e News, Health-e News
October 31, 2005
MOST READ
US funding freeze disrupts HIV, TB, and GBV support services
Healthcare coalition says NHI is “unfeasible”, proposes alternative route to universal health coverage
Kindness costs: The hidden sacrifices nurses make for patients with TB
EDITOR'S PICKS
Related

Stories From The Ground: Teen mum juggling school and a baby set to write matric finals

Stories from the ground: A mother’s journey towards beating breast cancer

Stories from the ground: EC nurse fears for her life as clinics come under siege from criminals

Stories From The Ground: Teen mum juggling school and a baby set to write matric finals

Stories from the ground: A mother’s journey towards beating breast cancer
