Tabloids and the Glocalization of Pop u lar Media
It is hard to miss the tabloid newspapers at newsstands, in corner shops, and on street corners in South Africa. Th eir mastheads are brightly colored, and the headlines, printed in big capital letters and oft en underlined, italicized, or with an exclamation mark adding emphasis, scream out a sensational bit of news across the whole of the front page: Murder for Money!; The Girls Who Pee Spoons!; Body in Attic!; Gru- Vonds (Horror fi nd); Tragedy!; Gevang!
(Caught!).1 Around the main story box, there are usually several teasers inviting the reader to turn to a gripping story, feature, or contest on an inside page. Th e visually striking cover also uses large photos.
A copy of Th e Sun in Britain looks much the same at fi rst glance. Th e red- top masthead on Th e Sun or the Daily Star in the United Kingdom is almost identi- cal to that of the Daily Sun and the Son in South Africa. Th e headlines are laid out in much the same way, with even the fonts showing a high degree of similar- ity. Th e similarity continues in the teaser boxes on the UK Sun’s front page, which promises exclusive photos, giveaways, or competitions; the notorious
“page- three girl” in Son; and the middle- page celebrity spread. Th e Irish- owned In de pen dent Group’s South African tabloid, the Daily Voice, has the most dis- tinctive layout and color scheme, although its approach to stories is arguably more sensationalist and closer to the UK and Irish tabloids. In terms of layout, pre sen ta tion, and general approach to stories, similarities can also be found be- tween South African and U.S. tabloids (which were, at the outset, modeled on British tabloids) like the Star (News America Publishing), the Murdoch- owned New York Post and its competitor the New York Daily News (owned by Mortimer Zuckerman), and perhaps to a lesser extent with the supermarket tabloids like National Enquirer and National Examiner (see Bird 1992 for a discussion of these). It is, however, clear from even a cursory glance at the South African tab- loids, as well as from discussions with their editors, that the UK tabloids are the key source of inspiration.
Th ere are also important diff erences, especially in the tabloids’ subject matter and their socio- political role, which we will later explore in greater depth. But a certain kinship with the tradition of the UK tabloids cannot be denied. For many critics of the South African tabloids, fi nding a foreign- looking publication at their front door was not a welcome discovery. Some responses to the new tabloids were
tantamount to a nationalistic rejection of what were seen as degrading foreign infl uences on South African journalism. Consider the reaction by Manson (2005):
We all accept that tabloids will continue to launch and grow in this country. But instead of copying and pasting from the sick British model, why aren’t local tabloid own ers brave enough to embrace the spirit of our democracy? Why not accept that you can publish a tabloid without sacrifi cing your sense of social responsibility or the humanity of those you report on, and dare I suggest that of your writers and editors?
Guy Berger (2005a, 19), one of the tabloids’ fi ercest critics, also deplored the
“imitation” of British tabloid style (yet he also criticizes the narrow “nationalistic focus” in South African media):
Too much of our reporting is dull, dry and predictable— and of interest only to a bunch of middle- aged elites. Much else is trivial entertainment for dumbed- down masses, without any illuminating information. Th ere are many— too many—
mistakes and inaccuracies. Worst is the recent advent of imitating Fleet Street’s tabloid- style fi ctionalising and sensationalism. Th at mix of clichéd sexuality and soccer scandal does not make for a valued model of South African journalism.
Finally, the narrow, nationalistic focus in much media is an injustice to the richness of all who live in our society.
For these critics, the foreign model of tabloid journalism is a problem because the realities of South Africa demand a diff erent model of journalism. It raises the question of whether the South African tabloids are merely British red- tops in disguise, a genre that has parachuted into a context for which their style of jour- nalism is ill- suited, with the aim of exploiting local audiences in the ser vice of big capital (both foreign and locally owned). Th is question in itself is informed by a larger debate over the role of journalism in a developing country like South Africa, and the argument that foreign media infl uences constitute “media impe- rialism.” Th is chapter will briefl y explore some of these arguments and their theoretical underpinnings by summarizing the main arguments in the literature around notions of media, globalization, and development, focusing specifi cally on the contrast between the notions of media imperialism and media hybridity.
Th e globalization of the tabloid genre and the spread of “infotainment” through global media will be touched upon, including examples of tabloids elsewhere in Africa and in South African press history. Lastly, the local- global relationship in South African tabloids will be examined. In the following chapter, we will fur- ther explore the criticism South African tabloids have received from their col- leagues in the South African media industry and academics in media- related fi elds to see how the paradigm according to which mainstream journalism is practiced in the country was transgressed by the tabloids.
Tabloid Travels: From Ballads to Infotainment
Attributing the spread of pop u lar genres like tabloids around the world to the globalization of media can go some way in explaining why there is, at face value at least, such a similarity between the format of South African tabloids and
those found in other countries. At the same time, this explanation opens up a new set of questions.
Globalization is a complex and oft en disputed concept. Although its wide- spread use as a buzzword might suggest a broad consensus over its meaning, the scholarly debate about globalization, with the various theoretical positions oc- cupied in that debate and the vehement disagreements about what constitutes globalization, is a complex one. As Sparks (2007, 126) points out: “Th ere is a cer- tain banal agreement that globalization means greater interconnectedness and action at a distance, but beyond such generalities theories diff er in fundamental ways.” As part of the debate, the role of the media as facilitator or accelerator of globalization is oft en accepted, though it is not seen as central by all theorists (Rantanen 2005, 24). Some critics (e.g., Hafez 2007) even go as far as to call me- dia globalization a “myth.”
Th e global ubiquity of cultural goods originating in the West is a reminder of the unequal power relations in the globalization pro cess. One might be tempted to use the form and style of South African tabloids— in many ways similar to their British counterparts— as proof of this Western dominance. Yet, simplistic notions of cultural imperialism have been refuted by scholars indicating various forms of contrafl ow marking the encounter between the global and the local (Th ussu 2006). Attention is increasingly being paid to the heterogenizing eff ects of globalization (Rantanen 2005, 93), described by some (e.g., Kraidy 2002) as
“hybridity.” Both the homogenization and the heterogenization schools of thought have their fl aws— the latter mostly because of its over- estimation of au- dience agency and under- estimation of Western media power; the former be- cause it takes a homogenous nation- state as its point of departure, sees media infl uence as linear instead of multi- directional, and neglects audience agency (Rantanen 2005, 79, 94). Globalization theorists have also been taken to task for their perceived failure to provide empirical grounding for concepts like “hybrid- ization” or “glocalization” (Hafez 2007, 14). Robertson (1997, 25) proposes the latter term to mean that the global and the local are not pitted against each other, but are interconnected forces.
Th e relationship between the local and the global in the production, distribu- tion, and consumption of media has been the topic of a long- standing debate that is likely to continue for years to come. Of importance for a study such as this one, which deals with a local context marked by high cultural diversity, extreme ma- terial in e qual ity, and historically skewed distribution of symbolic power, is that national audiences are not homogenous and respond to their encounters with the global in diff erent ways (Rantanen 2005, 95). One way of describing how the heterogenization of the global occurs in local contexts is, in Appadurai’s terms (ibid., 98– 99), “indigenization,” whereby global media products are adapted to suit local tastes and preferences. Th e South African tabloids, using Western forms as a starting point but bringing in their own viewpoints, agendas, and cultural lexicon, may be seen as examples of “glocalization.”
Although the nuances of these debates fall outside of the scope of the current chapter, we will touch upon the broad distinctions between diff erent paradigms
within which globalization of the media may be viewed, especially as this pro- cess relates to a developmental context like the South African one. Th e debate around media or cultural imperialism is particularly relevant in light of accusa- tions that South African tabloids are uncritically copying from their UK counter- parts, and that this foreign infl uence is detrimental for South African journalism and society.
Tabloid Travels
Th e pro cess of tabloidization has been occurring on a global scale in more recent times, and the panic about the threat to journalism posed by this pro cess is currently one of the most widespread laments in academic and journalistic de- bates worldwide (Conboy 2006, 207; Sparks 2000, 1 and 5). Th e shift toward tab- loid genres in the news is seen to aff ect tastes and preferences regarding form, content, and pre sen ta tion as well as journalistic priorities, boundaries, ethics, and techniques (Conboy 2006, 207). Among the reasons for this pro cess, which has been seen as commencing with the introduction of commercial tele vi sion in the 1950s (ibid.),2 is the heightened competition among various media platforms as a result of the introduction of new media technologies like the internet. Because print, radio, and tele vi sion are at risk of losing large parts of their audiences to new media, they are seen to be increasing their provision of entertainment in an attempt to lure back readers, listeners, and viewers (Sparks 2000, 4).
A further reason for the spread of tabloidization, one which requires some nu- ance in the South African context, is the commercialization of news as a result of the increasing global dominance of free- market capitalism, accelerated by the collapse of communism in 1989 and the deregulation of media markets (Conboy 2008b, 207). In a cut- throat commercialized landscape, media own ers are seen to be relentlessly chasing profi ts and driving down journalistic standards in the pro cess (Sparks 2000, 4). As we will discuss further in chapter 5, which considers the distinction between tabloid readers as consumers and as citizens, post- apartheid South African society has been marked by a shift toward market- led macro- economic policies as well as the spread of a pervasive consumerism on a socio- cultural level. While these trends should at least partly be attributed to policies created by the post- apartheid government (especially during Th abo Mbeki’s presidency), these shift s can also be connected to global events and trends. Th e series of changes in global media markets set off by the fall of the Berlin Wall could also be seen to have had a ripple eff ect in South Africa. Th e demise of apartheid coincided with the fall of communism and the re- ordering of global geopolitics.3 Th e fundamental po liti cal changes in the country also al- lowed for the de- linking of newspaper houses from the po liti cal ideologies they had espoused under apartheid, leading to a re- ordering of the South African media landscape. Most notable in terms of the infl uence of foreign media for- mats and genres was the takeover of the English- language press by the Irish In- de pen dent Group that later established its own tabloid (the Daily Voice) in the wake of the success of tabloids belonging to the rival Naspers conglomerate.
Th e new openness toward global trends and infl uences aft er years of isolation, the infl ux of foreign capital into the local media market, business- friendly gov- ernment policies, and the “end of ideology” created a climate in post- apartheid South Africa where commercialized media could thrive. Th ese local circum- stances are important to note when viewing the emergence of South African tabloids as related to a global trend toward tabloidization. Not only can “tabloidi- zation” mean diff erent things in diff erent countries, but the pro cess is also de- pendent on a combination of factors relating to the media landscape, journalistic culture, and the economic and legal environment in various countries (Esser 1999, cited in Conboy 2006, 209). Th us, the pro cess has played out diff erently in various international contexts (see, e.g., Conboy 2006, 209– 213, Bird 1992, and Sparks 2000 for mainly the United States and Western Eu rope; Hallin 2000 for Mexico; Bek 2004 for Turkey; Örnebring 2008 for Sweden; and Bonner and McKay 2007 for Australia).
In Africa, the tabloid genre can be seen as one of several forms of pop u lar culture, which includes forms like music, tele vi sion, and theater. African pop u- lar culture has been seen as expression of “people’s disillusion and resentment”
toward offi cialdom (Barber 1987, 3), and, increasingly, as an emergent public space where citizenship is rehearsed and negotiated (Dolby 2006). Th e mere choice of such a pop u lar style instead of a more formal one associated with offi - cialdom can in itself be a “message of re sis tance” (West and Fair 1993, 105). Pop- u lar culture can also be seen as either a mediation between traditional and mod- ern forms, or the space where the very meanings of “traditional” and “modern”
can be negotiated (ibid., 107). However, it is not the medium (in this case, tab- loids) that possesses inherent characteristics that determines this pro cess, but rather its location within a “nexus of po liti cal, social, and economic relations”
that determines “which communicative resources will be available to whom, and what signifi cance will be embodied in the generative forms invoked” (ibid., 108).
Because it is the people using pop u lar forms, rather than the forms themselves, that undermines offi cialdom, government, and the status quo, pop u lar media could also be used to support dominant class interests (ibid., 110). Th is point is important to bear in mind when considering the amount of social change that one can expect of the South African tabloids, which are owned and managed by large commercial interests seeking profi t rather than social justice. Tabloids in South Africa, as a form of pop u lar media and ultimately linked to other commu- nicative pro cesses in society, therefore present a terrain where the meaning of culture, development, and democracy is contested between local and global forces. As West and Fair (ibid., 112) succinctly state:
All things taken into consideration, we must now see the terrain of communication in Africa for what it truly is: the locus of an intense struggle over the formulation of societal symbols and values, drawing upon and interpreting not only the meaning of the past, but the signifi cance and direction of the world at present. And as the African world at present contains a vast array of media forms, each with its own ever- shift ing position in the history of social relations, we must conclude that
contestation over the social functions and meanings of these media themselves will be an inseparable part of the struggle.
Th e fi rst tabloid infl uences on South African print media can already be noted in the 1930s and 1940s. Although these early examples of commercial papers of- ten had an element of sensation or populist appeal, they do not conform to the contemporary defi nition of tabloids (Froneman 2006, 23). Th e Black commercial press that developed in South Africa in the 1930s was owned by White business interests and acted to reinforce the po liti cal views of the White government.
Switzer (1988) gives a detailed account of the development of this press, which could for its commercialism and de- politicized stance be seen as an early ante- cedent of the contemporary South African tabloids. Switzer points out that very few of the in de pen dent African journals launched in South Africa in the 1880s that had been voicing dissent against White authoritarian rule survived the Great Depression of 1929– 1932. Th e expansion of a market for African consum- ers in the 1930s coincided with increased segregationist policies by the state, which included attempts to retribalize Africans. In this climate, liberal White business interests saw an opportunity to develop a Black commercial press (ibid., 352). Th e White- owned media conglomerate, Bantu Press, took over most of the ANC- aligned papers,4 starting a pro cess of depoliticizing journalism and creat- ing a compliant African middle class (Limb 2000, 96– 97).5
During the contemporary debates about South African tabloids, one of these Black commercial papers from the 1930s, Bantu World, has been compared—
highly unfavorably— to the tabloids by the veteran Black journalist, editor, and current Press Ombudsman, Joe Th loloe. Th loloe, who saw tabloids as a “fad” that was “bound to disappear” (Th loloe 2004) has described the Daily Sun as a “patro- nising throwback to the Bantu World of the 1950s” (ibid.; Th loloe 2005). His com- parison is based on what he saw as ste reo types of Blacks peddled by “white editorial directors who ‘knew’ the Bantu” (see chapter 4 for more details of his criticism).
Bantu World was indeed owned by White capital, and like the tabloids, it was also aimed primarily at an urban Black readership. Unlike the tabloids, however, it was more interested in the petit bourgeoisie than in the working class. Bantu World was a weekly paper, launched in April 1932 as part of Bantu Press (Pty.) Ltd. by Bertram F. G. Paver, a “failed farmer and advertising salesman” (Switzer 1988, 352). Shortly aft er its establishment, the Bantu Press (Pty.) Ltd. was taken over by the Argus Group, in which Cecil John Rhodes had bought a controlling interest in 1881. Th e African shareholders were bought out, and the Black jour- nalists were removed from its board of directors (ibid.). Th is was part of the Ar- gus Group’s plan to counter the socialistic ideas gaining currency in the country and in neighboring Lesotho by “channel[ing] native thoughts away from politics and into safer pursuits” in its newspapers (Bourgault 1995, 160). In this project, the Argus Group gained the support of the Anglo- American corporation in the 1950s, as they shared a base in mining capital (ibid.). Bantu Press later expanded into Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), Northern Rhodesia (Zambia), Nyasaland (Malawi), Basutoland (Lesotho), Swaziland, and Bechuanaland (Botswana) as