Information on
former presidentNelson Mandela's admission to hospital is being made available
quicker than previously, a Rhodes University academic said.
"Last time
there was more of a gap, uncertainty," professor of journalism Herman
Wasserman said.
"This time
information seems to be coming out more quickly," said Wasserman, deputy
head at the school of journalism.
This was after the
presidency issued a statement on Saturday, Sunday, and Monday to brief the
media on the anti-apartheid stalwart and Nobel Peace Prize co-winner's
admission for tests "consistent with his age".
On Monday,
presidency spokesperson Mac Maharaj responded to a Sapa inquiry to say there
was no cause for alarm.
According to
Monday's statement doctors would conduct further tests.
The public and
family were also thanked for messages of support, and the media for affording
him privacy.
It added that
Monday was the anniversary of Mandela receiving the Nobel Peace Prize with
former apartheid-era president FW de Klerk in 1993.
This was in
contrast to what was described as a "media blackout" when Mandela was
admitted to Johannesburg's Milpark Hospital in Johannesburg in January 2011 for
a respiratory infection.
The dearth of
information after one release issued on the Wednesday from the Nelson Mandela
Foundation then escalated to rumours that he had died.
The Observer
journalist David Smith wrote: "... the Twitter rumour mill ran wild - not
the social network's finest hour."
Mail &
Guardian editor Nic Dawes also wrote after that time: "So while the
Mandela family and African National Congress leaders visited Milpark on
Thursday, the rest of the country huddled as if in a national waiting room,
anxiously parsing fragmentary and confusing news reports for information."
On the Friday,
Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe and SA National Defence Force Surgeon
General Vejaynand Ramlakan eventually gave details of Mandela's treatment and
recovery at a packed media briefing.
The foundation
only issued a statement on the Monday after he returned home. Later it emerged
that there had been a disagreement over who should handle communications over
his health.
At a meeting with
editors it was agreed that communication on his health would be improved in
future and would be through the presidency.
Vulture journalism
Wasserman said
journalists also had to consider what sort of extra information they needed.
"Everybody is wishing him well and there is a collective desire in the
country to have good news.
"But at the
same time, it calls for a bit of restraint, holding back. A point at which the
media must wait and see."
But, he said if it
had been President Jacob Zuma in hospital the public interest factor would have
been stronger than public curiosity.
People would
wonder in that case if there was somebody in place to govern, and so the desire
for more information would be understandable.
Getting relevant
information out was important to counter the possibility of "vulture
journalism".
"If you send
information promptly, the stronger is the need to not camp out [outside a
hospital].
"Withholding
information might play into the hands of the paparazzi," he said.
Professor Anton
Harber, who directs the journalism and media studies programme at the
University of Witwatersrand, said he was overseas and so had not been able to
measure the current coverage.
However, he
advocated "at least twice-daily updates, even if they were
"one-liners". More often if there were developments, good or bad.
This was apart
from more substantial and reassuring "face-to-face" communication, he
said.
Meanwhile, Maharaj
told the BBC on Monday they wanted to avoid Mandela's health being treated like
"a movement of share prices on the stockmarket", and wanted his
family to be with him without having to answer questions.
He said the media
had generally responded well.