Dear Ms Ferial Haffajee
RE: CITY PRESS ARTICLE
TITLED “LETSEBE’s BOGUS CV EARNS
HIM A PROMOTION
Our discussion this
morning refers.
The article published
by City Press on the 15th November 2009 titled
“Letsebe’s Bogus CV earns MDDA promotion”
is bordering on inaccuracy and unfairness against
article 1.1 of the South African Press Code.
Further, the article violates articles 1.2,
1.3, 1.10, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, etc. of the South
African Press Code as outlines below:
1. The note/ caption
to the picture refer to me as a Projects Director
of the MDDA. This is inaccurate contrary to
article 1.1 of the South African Press Code;
I am the CEO of the Agency.
2. The note / caption
to the picture suggest I pleaded ignorance.
This is misleading the public/readers and gives
an unreasonable reflection of the contents of
the article in question, contrary to article
5.2 of the South African Press Code. At no stage
in the interview I had with Mr. Mantshantsha
or in the article in question did I plead ignorance.
3. The headline suggests
Mr. Letsebe’s CV is bogus and that the
“bogus CV” led to the promotion.
I had clarified this to Mr. Mantshantsha and
explained that:
a. The CV did indicate that Mr. Letsebe did
not complete his law degree. Therefore the error
was simply in the press statement issued long
after the appointment. Mr. Letsebe’s appointment
was approved in September 2009; the statement
was issued on the 08th October 2009. This is
clearly imbalanced reporting, possibly with
intentional or negligent departure from the
facts by distortion, exaggeration or misrepresentation;
and material omissions of the fact that the
erroneous statement did not inform the appointment
at all. This violates article 1.2 of the South
African Press Code.
b. The CV was not bogus. I even emailed the
CV to Mr. Mantshantsha on Friday the 30th October
2009 at 12h02. It states qualifications and
experience of Mr. Letsebe in detail.
4. Paragraph 1 suggests
that the promotion of Mr. Letsebe was based
on “fictional qualifications”. As
stated above the appointment was approved in
September 2009 based on the merit of his equivalent
and relevant experience not the law degree,
nor the submitted certificates from UCT and
Wits. The erroneous statement was issued on
the 08th October 2009 and corrected on the 30th
October 2009. The article clearly is misleading
the readers by material omission again violating
1.2.2 of the South African Press Code.
5. Further, the article
quoting an “anonymous” employee
says that the MDDA CEO threatened staff after
Fin24.com quizzed him about this allegation.
I dispute this as misinformation and unfounded.
On the 30th October 2009, I indeed convened
a staff meeting alerting the staff of this article
which was to be published by Fin24.com. In convening
the meeting, I was preparing the team for the
news that was to be published against one of
the staff members, provided the facts about
the appointment process of Mr. Letsebe and asked
members of the team to base their engagements
on this matter on facts. This is how the meeting
ended; there was never a threat to anyone by
the CEO. Mr. Mantshantsha did not call me like
he did with the other allegations to confirm
whether such threatening did indeed take place.
This is in violation of article 1.4 of the South
African Press Code requiring that such reports
be verified.
6. Mr. Mantshantsha
incorrectly says in his second last paragraph
that the corrected version was sent only to
Fin24.com, he says, “no other media houses
were sent the ‘corrected’ version”.
The corrected statement was issued on the 30th
October 2009 and published in the pressoffice,
the MDDA website and by such media as Bizcommunity.
Again, his assertion is inaccurate contrary
to article 1.1 of the South African Press Code.
7. The Agency reinforces
its statement that Mr. Letsebe was appointed
on merit, on the basis of his vast relevant
experience, skills and expertise. He has been
with the MDDA from its inception as a Programme
Manager (Community Media) which is responsible
for 60% of the grant fund. He was part of the
process of setting up the Agency, its systems
and procedures. He brings a wealth of experience
in grant making, leadership and knowledge of
the media industry. He has been involved in
media development for more than 10 years. Therefore,
the allegation (from an anonymous employee)
of favoritism is ridiculous; Mr. Letsebe has
long been employed by the Agency.
South Africa should
not allow itself to be diverted from its mission
to work together towards ensuring that each
and every South African citizen has access to
a choice of a diverse range of media through
the work of Agencies like the MDDA. The MDDA
and its partners are committed to promoting
media development and diversity; and as a contribution
to the transformation of the media in South
Africa in the public interest.
Yours sincerely
Lumko Mtimde
Chief Executive Officer
