Media Must Avoid Careless References to Foreign Nationals When Reporting Crimes

Our Ombud Watcher cannot find any logical or coherent basis for a need to identify a criminal suspect as a foreign national in a BloemNews article when it was within a context that a reasonable reader would read something negative into the reference to foreignness.

In a very short article that runs to just 126 words, including its headline, Media24’s BloemNews deemed it appropriate to mention that the person arrested “for possession of illicit cigarettes” at a warehouse in the Bloemfontein CBD is a foreign national.

“This type of illegal activity is negatively affecting our economy,” the publication quoted the provincial police commissioner as saying, who added that SAPS “would like to applaud the vigilance of [its] members in responding to illegal activities of this nature”.

Not an expert in the field, this commentator deemed it appropriate to do a bit of research, establishing that the illicit cigarette trade is defined as “the production, import, export, purchase, sale, or possession of tobacco goods which fail to comply with legislation”. It includes, for example, the sale of cigarettes manufactured abroad that are smuggled into the country, without paying any domestic duties, as well as the sale of counterfeits manufactured locally, in respect of which duties are also not paid.

The article says nothing about the nature of the illicit cigarettes that were found in the warehouse and then confiscated. All that we are told is that 97 boxes of them were found, worth an estimated R1.9-million, and that the suspect was arrested for possession. This squarely raises the appropriateness of disclosing their non-South African status, in circumstances where we are not told where the cigarettes were manufactured, and whether they crossed any international border unlawfully.

Unhappy with the article, the Asylum Seeker, Refugee and Migrant Coalition (“the ASRM Coalition”) lodged a complaint with the Press Council, alleging that in identifying the suspect’s nationality, BloemNews had breached clause 5.1 of the Press Code, which reads as follows:

“The media shall … avoid discriminatory or denigratory references to people’s race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth or other status, and not refer to such status in a prejudicial or pejorative context – and shall refer to the above only where it is strictly relevant to the matter reported, and if it is in the public interest”.

It is interesting to note that while the suspect’s age is also given, there is no mention of their sex or gender, just as there is no mention of the provincial police commissioner’s sex or gender. (The Deputy Ombud, however, misgendered Lieutenant General Baile Motswenyane, who happens to be a woman.)

There is also no mention of their immigration status. All that we know is that the suspect is not South African, which could mean many different things.

“The gist of the complaint”, the Deputy Ombud noted, “is that the reference to a ‘foreign national’ in the first paragraph of the BloemNews article is irrelevant and that it has the potential to propagate harmful stereotypes about non-South African citizens.”

As clause 5.1 of the Press Code tells us, reference to status such as nationality – when used in a discriminatory or denigratory context – is only permitted when it is “strictly relevant to the matter reported”.

The ASRM Coalition took the view “that a reference to nationality in crime reporting can reinforce or perpetuate certain harmful stereotypes of non-citizens”.

“In general terms”, the Deputy Ombud appeared to agree, “ill-considered or gratuitous references to the nationality of non-South African citizens can indeed play a destructive role in generating hostility among South Africans towards non-citizens.”

He continued: “Xenophobia has certainly become a problem of increasing concern in South Africa as can be seen, for example, in the violent attacks on foreign nationals in May 2008, which claimed the lives of at least 19 people from other countries.”

“Nevertheless, it is far-fetched to suggest that, in and of itself, the reference in the first paragraph of the BloemNews article to a ‘foreign national’ either denigrates or stereotypes non-citizens.”

But it was not just that single reference which concerns this commentator. It was the reference used in the context of an article quoting the most senior police official in the province saying that “[t]his type of illegal activity is negatively affecting our economy”.

It would be naïve to suggest that in the absence of any further detail, the reasonable reader is not reading something negative into the reference to foreignness.

So why even mention that the suspect is not South African? How is the reference to nationality strictly relevant here, when the alleged crime is simply one of possession?

After considering a range of previous rulings on the topic, the Deputy Ombud states: “In conclusion, it is necessary to emphasise that there cannot be a blanket ban on references to the alleged involvement of foreign nationals in crime reporting. Each instance must be weighed up and assessed on its own merits.”

“And, when doing so, the media must exercise due care and consideration to avoid careless and gratuitous references to the alleged involvement of foreign nationals in criminal activities. Failing to do so would not only be reckless and even dangerous, but in disregard of the Press Code.”

And yet, despite this warning, the Deputy Ombud dismissed the complaint.

Try as one might, one cannot find any logical or coherent basis even to suggest that on the facts of the case as reported, there was any need for the suspect to be identified as a foreign national. The best the Deputy Ombud could do was to downplay the single reference, and in so doing, to undermine the very warning he sought to give.

GroundUp’s reporters and editors are not unanimous on the issue of whether the Deputy Ombud should have ruled against BloemNews but we are unanimous in our view that referring to people’s nationality gratuitously is a poor media practice.

This column aims to bring Press Ombud rulings to a wider audience and to give more public scrutiny to the rulings. The column is written by a legal practitioner.

© 2025 GroundUp. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

You may republish this article, so long as you credit the authors and GroundUp, and do not change the text. Please include a link back to the original article.

We put an invisible pixel in the article so that we can count traffic to republishers. All analytics tools are solely on our servers. We do not give our logs to any third party. Logs are deleted after two weeks. We do not use any IP address identifying information except to count regional traffic. We are solely interested in counting hits, not tracking users. If you republish, please do not delete the invisible pixel.