We’ve had to put up with David Bullard for years, so it was with delight that we heard he’d been fired. But it seems there are those who are rallying to his defence, citing Machiavellian corporate and political machinations as the real reason for his axing.
It’s all bullshit, of course. David Bullard was fired for writing a column in which he described blacks as being lazy, incapable of technological advancement, genocidal, primitive and clueless — all the while waiting for someone else to blame for their misfortunes.
That is racist.
So, imagine you’re at a dinner party where you come face to face with a Bullard supporter. Here’s our quick guide on how to respond to “Bring back Bullard” arguments:
The column is not in any way critical of the ANC or the government. All it does is make some deeply offensive comments about Africans.
2. It’s a free-speech issue
Yes, it’s a free country and you can say what you want. You’re even allowed to insult and offend people. But nowhere in the Constitution does it say you have the right to share your prejudices with the more than three million readers of the country’s biggest newspaper.
3. David Bullard is the new Deon Maas
He is not. Tim du Plessis, the editor of Rapport, first defended Maas’s column — and then caved in after a small minority of its readers launched an SMS campaign to boycott the paper. Du Plessis then fired Maas, citing commercial reasons. In so doing, Du Plessis compromised his own editorial independence.
Makhanya, on the other hand, is exercising his prerogative as editor of the newspaper. He fired Bullard for editorial reasons. Makhanya is on the record as saying that it was his own decision. In other words, he is doing his job — asserting his editorial independence.
The Bullard saga should rather be compared to the firing of Jon Qwelane from the Star some years back, after readers complained about what they regarded as racist rantings against whites. We can’t remember too many white people complaining about that.
This is a serious allegation as it undermines Makhanya’s integrity. Nobody has provided a shred of evidence to back up this rumour. Makhanya, however, is quoted — on the record — as saying that his decision had nothing to do with the Empire article.
5. The Sunday Times will lose sales
Some have suggested that the Sunday Times will “undoubtedly” lose sales, especially among upper LSM readers, because of Bullard’s exit. Sure, perhaps some white readers will stop reading the paper. But what about all the black readers that Bullard’s column has alienated over the years?
6. If you’re offended by Bullard, you don’t have a sense of humour
Playing the sense of humour card is no different to playing the race card. Just because something is funny doesn’t make it acceptable. We’ve all laughed at inappropriate jokes. But we don’t put them in the newspaper. Political satire is not a licence to be racist. (This argument would have more force if Bullard’s column had actually been funny.)
80 Responses to “Save us from the Save David Bullard brigade”
I support freedom of speech, whether I agree with what that person says or not. Clearly the idea of free speech has not been well understood in Africa, given the current suppression of it in many countries to the north of us, and its suppression in the past in this country. I firmly believe that any censorship suffocates the conversation and exchange that we should be having between people with differing viewpoints. It is only by confronting these varying viewpoints head on and dealing with them directly, instead of suppressing them or wishing them away, that we can progress. However, there is also a thing called tactfulness that people also seem to forget in their brash tirades - and such a tone tends to immediately close many peoples’ minds to the actual message the writer or speaker is trying to make. My main point is that lets not shy away from these issues, or silence each other, but lets approach them in a respectful way with meaningful dialogue. Lets begin this conversation!
Please see “Was Dave’s drivel really racist”. I’m copying my response here.
“I also cannot understand the fuss. Unless, of course, he (Dave) hit some nuanced nerve somewhere. History is a story of colonialism. Try reading Clive Ponting’s “A New Green History of the World” for a perspective on this. The book’s a bit ponderous, but worth reading.
There is also the issue of second language and culture; sometimes things are read in a language which is not one’s mother tongue which mean something different to the reader than the writer. Then there are subtle cultural issues which are not obvious to those outside the culture. Sometimes I think this is why the politicians so often stir up a storm without understanding what they said wrong. Either way, tolerance and education are called for, not firing!”
Not everything needs to be debated. Debate lends some justification/legitimacy to opinions and Bullard’s opinions are without merit and should not be debated. It’s on a par with the “creationist vs evolution debate”. By merely trying to start a debate, creationists attempt to garner legitimacy for their crack-pot theories. Bullard was just plan wrong to write that column - which wasn’t even that funny.
Also, this isn’t a censorship issue - if you write stupid articles and voice innane opinions, you must be prepared to be fired.
He should stick to writing about cars
I am white. I am no bleeding heart liberal. True I find the bulk of DB’s columns drivel. When I read DB’s column last Sunday I thought he has gone way over the line. His firing was totally in order!
It seems that ever since DB got attacked his columns have become increasingly vitriolic. This time he just way overstepped the mark.
DB was just echoing what most northern hemisphere peoples think.
Read up on the article on the Malaysian company operating a texttile factory in Windhoek. The Malaysians brought in Chinese and others workers as Nambian workers did not work hard enough.
Sub Sahara native africans need to address this issue of perceived laziness if they hope to be taken seriously and not suffer the DB type tirades.
The new French president made similar comments to that of DB’s a while back.
Is it racism or just plain frank and blunt speaking?
That is, if I call a northern hemisphere child lazy that is OK, the child is lazy but try calling a black kid lazy?
There is a tremendous divergence of views now happening, increasing racism by black and white alike.
I am also a victim of this: increasingly racist against black people in general because of the crime and corruption which the ANC is encouraging. I’ts not fun.
But fortunately at a personal level, i still meet with anyone of any colour equally. I’m lucky like that, and blacks are superior in direct social skills terms.
Actually I enjoyed his column and thought the last was rather interesting for a number of reasons.
It was Thabo Mbeki’s brother who not too long ago said that Africans had been better off under colonial rule as the average African is now poorer than during the age of colonialism. Could we construe that as being racist too, that the white colonialists had been better at managing the countries wealth than say the blacks who took over?
“Mr Mbeki pointed out that China had lifted 400 million people out of penury during the past 20 years while, over the same period, 90 million Nigerians had fallen below the poverty line despite their country’s oil wealth.” and that “Africa’s post-colonial rulers of neglecting development and wasting money on enormous entourages of civil servants”
What does that highlight about Africa? With no doubt they are clueless when it come to managing their countries wealth. Primitive as they subscribe to an old system of feudalism. Lazy, I could not agree however clearly greedy at the expense of their fellow man. Mugabe is a good example of a man with a primitive mindset. Does nationalisation of the countries mines and “redistribution of wealth” rings any bells? Redistributed as in Uganda? Genocidal, pick a country in Africa (Uganda, South Africa, Kenya, Sierra Leone et.al) Also known as ethnic cleansing.
When these rulers are asked where the wealth of their countries are, they have no idea and blame the colonialists for their misfortunes instead of blaming their own inequities.
I read him some years back when he was of a happier disposition. He’d been a favourite of my late father, who like this author himself did not suffer fools gladly. So when I heard he’d been fired I immediately sprang to his defense. I’m a journalism graduate myself and freedom of expression is something I value dearly. It is what sets us apart from the likes of Zimbabwe.
David, one excuse you haven’t mentioned is the fact that his brief was to be controversial - isn’t it a bit pathetic to now fire him because the Sunday Times couldn’t control what they created? To run the column and then fire him also makes old Mondi look like he is not doing his job, neither the sub-editor and all the others in the production chain.
But I must say old David has seriously lost his sense of humour since the shooting incident. And he needs some therapy (so do all South Africans who have been victims of crime). I read the offending column and a few recent others and I can now see why his time was finally up. He just isn’t funny anymore and you can’t lecture people on the silly things they do if you’re not funny! We need a new black satirical author. There are a few Thought Leaders that I’d like to recommend for the job. I think Ndumiso Ngcobo can show Jon Qwelane how to write.
I hope David regains his former equilibrium because despite having had a very public meltdown he should be valued because he speaks his mind. And there are alot of people who agree with his views - wrong or not. And many who hate him still read his column every week because he writes so damn well. Someone said that as a satirist you should be examining yourself more than others. I hope Bullard takes that advice.
Here we have the left-wing and liberals’ true colours showing. Freedom of speech seemingly only applies to those who spew the tired, politically correct mantras, for example “there are no differences except skin colour between races”.
As soon as Bullard wrote a 100% factual and accurate column - no African south of the Sahara ever invented the wheel, door hinges or even writing - he gets crucified and fired.
This is a prime example of Orwellian thought control, where the truth is verboten by the PC Nazis. As Orwell said: “In times of universal deceit, telling the truth would be a revolutionary act”.
You can fire Bullard, Thought Police, but you cannot hide the truth. The revolution against political correctness has started, and will consume you.
Your first sentence tells it all! You had to put up with DB all those years? What bloody nonsense, do you really mean to tell us that you had no option but to read his columns every week? If I think a particular columnist usually talks drivel I just don’t read him/her, finish and klaar. The rest of your article is in the same vein.
We all have thoughts which really shouldn’t be shared. That’s just the way it is. Rather like telling your bud that his new chick has a really fat arse. Not a good idea.
The real issue here is that David Bullard’s article saw the light of day. It never should have. The checks and balances should have been in place to prevent this cockup.
The fact that DB wrote the article is not the problem.
The fact that the Sunday Times published it, is.
Although not a particularly suitable analogy, it is akin to shooting the messenger.
If you want to get mad with anyone, get mad with the Sunday Times for allowing this article to be pressed.
Bullard should have been cautioned, without the article being printed. The established checks and balances of publishing conveniently didn’t work. Funny that. Is it possible ST let the article through so they would have a reason to fire DB?
The whole incident smacks of hidden agendas. Political and Corporate. If you cannot see this, then you are destined for mediocrity yourselves.
the Editor is ultimately responsible for the content of the paper. If the editor who fired him was doing his job, the column would never have even come close to the presses. It would have been pulled before the print run.
While I don’t agree with the content of the column, David has been made a scapegoat for a poor job done by the editor.
At most, he should have been rapped over the knuckles and his column pulled, in the offices of the ST and out of view of the public.
You just dislike David Bullard because he is better than you. You are just a limp-minded one tooth dwarf in the land of idiots. David Bullart deserves a statue for his guts to say it the way it is.
Notice the people with Afrikaans surnames rejoicing in the column of “David Bullard. Well here is a half Afrikaner who despises any references to white superiority.
Let’s keep it real:
Europe and the New World nations have in the past 200 years been at the head of science and technology through the evolution POST the centuries of the inward struggles of nationalisms, religious persecutions, wars, wars, wars and other suppressions of the true human spirit (and might we overlook the two world wars which Europe endured after all the poison I have just mentioned above). Fact is that the West has a complacent youth who do not care about anything besides spending Daddy’s inheritance for their own hedonism. Civilisations rise and fall and have always done simply that. As a visually Caucasian, I don’t believe my ancestors to be any better or worse than any other.
China and India are the new emerging super powers, in all reality. Britain and the USA sit with the reality of a hard recession just around the corner. Western world economic turmoil is just around the corner.
I am half Irish and lived in Europe for many years. The reality is very different to your idea of paradise in Europe.
In a world of exchange and air travel, medical scientists do not fail to ignore the contributions of traditional health practitioners in local communities. Neither do the value of cultural practices, practised in smaller communities, have any less importance to us as WE DEVELOP INTO BETTER BEINGS, ABLE TO ACCEPT PEOPLE WHO ARE DIFFERENT TO US. Diseases keep cropping up in places where they had not been before. Africa may be in it’s younger in building up civilisations, Africa being a larger spread of land and smaller population than the rest of the world. Migration throughout the ages in Africa has spread communities far and wide.
Europe had to contend with a continent which does not supply much food in winter months and had to ingeniously come up with solutions to deal with this huge problem. Development came through achieving this end. Egypt was a civilisation which had a desert to contend with and found ways to store food in months when there was no supply of food. Civilisations are based on communities having to contend with hardship and working out solutions to avail them to deal better with their environment.
Africa faces such pressure in the global economic race to ensure it’s survival. Ingenious inventors are cropping up in communities around the world, as they take on the struggle to better theirs’ and others’ around thems’ circumstances.
Stop being so ignorant and realise that as Condoleezza Rice says: “Education can be learnt”. This is a woman by the way with intelligence and degrees way beyond all the people here who swipe about white superiority. YOU WILL STILL BE CAUGHT UP IN YOUR OWN IGNORANCE WHEN THE WORLD CHANGES AND WHITES NO LONGER CARRY THE MONOPOLY.
“You just dislike David Bullard because he is better than you. You are just a limp-minded one tooth dwarf in the land of idiots. David Bullart deserves a statue for his guts to say it the way it is.
oom Kondoom on April 12th, 2008 at 2:43 pm”
LOL! Nau hi issss nodt bettterrrrr dan mi! LOL! Love the grammar, spelling and vocabulary!! And you still think dat becoss you are Blanke you are superior! LOL!
Dumisani Lloyd Mkhize on April 12th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
David Bullard needs to get some therapy. He is not the same person since he was shot. The tone of his articles has become more vindictive of late. The Sunday Times editorial management must have seen this trend. He was set up; there is no way that they could not have read his column before publishing. Mondli Makhanya should have pulled the article. He needed help not firing. Robert Brand should have seen this also and his comments are out of line.
i m glad this over the top, racist, know it all drivel is gone, he’s had too big a bite and for too long. i can now descend down the nearest shop without the perrenial uneasiness a the encounter wih this journalistic fronting of crass bigotry.
Surprising , I have heard jokes abote the Irish being describes exactly they way David describes Black Africans and we including the Irish all roar with laughter. Maybe we just need to learn to laugh at ourselves?
Heaven save us from the Tyranny of the Self Righteous. The firing of David will be something that South Africans will live to regret. Thanks to band of the self righteous we will get to live in the cosy world of self righteous censorship. All power to our Masters who tell us what to think and say and write, just in case it offends little Robert or others with the sames sensibilities.
The problem is that David’s observations were a little too close to the truth for anyone to feel comfortable with, especially Makhanya who is trying to cover his own butt. As for Mr Brand, well David never did have to stoop to using words like “bullshit” to make his point. Ever erudite and pointed in his wit, his clever syntax and use of language was sufficient. More power to David’s pen!
Bullard column last Sunday was puerile and I have no doubt that in the years ahead he will cringe when re-reading it.
However, take care that you do not appear as being spiteful when you delight in the fact that he has lost his job simply for doing what he was paid to do. The Sunday Times is hardly a font of erudition. The point has been made but it bears repeating. Why did it take 5 days to decide that the column was unaccepatble and what happened to the editorial process. This smacks of the very incompetence that Bullard was writing about.
To my laymans eyes his dismissal and this blog are redolent of axe’s being ground and that has to be bad for journalism in the classroom or in the real world.
Amazing lot you liberals - particularly this juvenile author.
The ANC is busy “re-writing” South African history especially as taught in schools to give a “more truthful reflection” of the “liberation struggle”.
The fruits of this so-called liberation struggle that we see in South Africa today amounts to little less than the creation of a black ruling elite characterised by nepotism, corruption and incompetence, a couple of black billionaires not averse to splurging a few cool million on the ANCYL debacle, the outright murder, rape, pillage and plunder of formerly “White” South Africa and a black population facing a distinctly Zimbabweanesque future.
That the “re-written” history the ANC is espousing is a study in a variety of lies and deceits of omission and commission has nary a whimper emanating from the faithfully sycophantic liberal left is characteristic of it’s legendary double standards and is to be expected, but compared to the tongue in cheek article Bullard wrote, is the mother of a long litany of ANC lies and deceit WITHOUT a whimper from our liberals! The typically kryptonite manner with which the ANC and their darling, left wing analingual liberal groupies treat truthful exposes of the farce that is South Africa today, albeit couched in satire, is an indictment of the first order of the ANC as well as liberal weeners.
To all you truthful, and hopefully outraged and indignant liberal treasonists, I challenge you in the spirit of freedom of speech to answer this:
Against the backdrop of Africa today, after nearly 60 years of decolonisation, if whites had not come to SA what is the most likely scenario we would be faced with today in SA?
Secondly, if whites did not “Colonise” South Africa - which incidentally they didn’t - and against the backdrop of Sino-Soviet involvement and support of black nationalist “Liberation Struggles”, particulalry Robert Mugabe since the 60’s; and we can see what’s happening there, can liberals with all honesty say that Africa would not have been “colonised” by anybody else?
You can bet your next carefully censored, selectively sanitised brace of liberal bullshit, as this adolescent author put it, that if Africa had not been “colonised” by the previous “colonisers” it would certainly have been “colonised” by other “colonisers” and last time I looked, the Chinese were happily beavering away at doing precisely that, starting with the Tanzam railway in the 60’s to buying out virtually a controlling interest in Africa’s biggest banking institution, which just happens to manage ALL the ANC’s national and local financial affairs.
As they say, “Many a true word spoken in jest” - Bullard hit the nail on the head most of the time and he got nailed for it, excuse the pun - he was fired for telling the truth.
Whites are scoundrels who, out of pure malice and greed for oil and resources, have invaded countries like Iraq where they have slaughtered hundreds of thousands of the peace-loving inhabitants. In Africa white colonialists have stolen vast tracts of land, abused and exploited the noble peace-loving “true owners” who they forced to work for a pittance as virtual slaves. Wherever whites have set foot, they have destroyed indigenous cultures, stolen their history and dignity, raped their women, and spread “European diseases” whilst pretending themselves to be the master race. And yet, when Africans were building pyramids and great cities and civilizations, whites were living in dingy caves, smearing themselves with mud, running around in animal skins, bashing each others skulls in, and making human sacrifices of their captives.
These are not my words and thoughts but they are clearly those of many high profile SA black journalists. Admittedly, one wont find everything above in a single article, but its becoming increasingly hard to pick up a South African newspaper and not read a long slanderous tirade against whites. In fact many black journalists seem to build their careers by spewing hatred and invective against whites, and they do so seemingly with impunity. To the best of my knowledge not one black journalist or media personality has lost his or her job for making racist remarks. Yet dozens of whites have been dismissed for making far milder comments.
Ian Smith spoke the truth…”if you skin is black, you can be forgiven for anything..!”
I never quite liked DB’s columns and never could understand the fuss at all about his articles. Simply because I could never understand what his beef was. I dont quite understand why being opinionated is an attractive quality. I persnally prefer opinions that are backed up with facts. I guess there is no such thing though All this talk about Africans (a consciouys effort is made to separate Egypt from Africa!) never having invented anything is a whole lot of racist rubbish designed to perpetuate the stereotypes and white racial hegemony. I find a lot of people very ignorant. Has anyone ever read and heard of the Timbuktu Manuscripts? Manuscripts of ancient learning of peoples of Africa found in Mali that contained advances in mathematics, geometry and science? Has anyone visited the Great Zimbabwe Ruins in Zimbabwe? -The ancient city that was built of perfectly hewn stone in distinct geometric shapes without mortar? European just couldnt resist the temptation to denigrate that stupendous achievement and claim that Eurpoeans built the structure. When europeans came to africa they found a people who had mastered the technology of mining iron and gold ores from the ground and smelting these into iron and gold. The only competitive advantage that europeans to africa was their mastery of seafare and maritime superiority only. That made the difference. I dont subscribe to the perception that black people are lazy and incompetent nor to the concomitant perception that white people are competent and hardworking. Far from it. I have a PhD in mathematics and I am black and I certainly dont regard myself as lazy. I encourage the readers to read widely and be informed and make their own conclusions. I have read widely and i have come to the conclusion that there has been a deliberate attempt in history to distort and deny black peoples and people of african descent of any rightful credit due to them for any advancement in learning, science, technology. I recommend a book called “The inventive spirit of African Americans” plus a lot of books out there.
Let’s be honest,
DB messed up.I also agree that ST has got some more firing to do, especially since the internal controls failed to prevent such a distasteful article from being published.
Bottom line though is that no one has a right to attack any group based on ethnicity. I myself think very little of white racists, especially afrikanners. They think they are gods and superior to any other race…They still hold our economy because of the inheritance from their forefathers of the apartheid era.
That’s my opinion but if I were to write that on any of my official reports, I’d definitely get axed, whether my supervisor was also negligent in just signing off without checking the political correctness.
People should refrain from writing stupid articles.
Charles has really taken the words out of my mouth. David Bullard is a brilliant journalist and I trully enjoyed reading his articles. However, after the brutal assault he suffered in the hands of thugs (black) who attacked him at his home, he changed completely.
He started to become very mean, his attitude towards black people suddenly changed. His columns stopped being funny and tounge in cheek but became vitrolic, angry and highly abusive towards black people in general and the ruling class in particular.
I don’t know whether he took the trouble to be counselled after the attack. Whatever happened that night, the David Bullard I knew and enjoyed reading every Sunday without fail, figuratively died and a racist monster was born. How so unfortunate, how so sad.
Habitual newshounds and opinion seekers have stumbled into and been subject to the vituperatively racist writings of the Brave Dullard for far too long. Credit must go to the Sunday Times for protecting his right to express his frequently insidiously poisonous views.
Dave is contentious and I hope he continues to be so — elsewhere. However, he is also racist and nothing can excuse that — least of all others’ attempts to obfuscate or explain away his racism.
Contentious contributions to our robust debate on racism in South Africa must be welcomed, no matter that such contributions occasionally cause the debate to overheat. However, too many readers appear incapable of distinguishing contributions to a needed debate from the racism or hate speech it seeks to address.
Thank you for pointing out how different Bullard’s position — and level of journalism — is to that of ST editor and M&G graduate Mondli Makhanya and several other columnists. (Why does Justice Malala spring so readily to mind?)
Makhanya, Malala and their ilk have spent their careers exposing corporate and political malfeasance whenever and wherever they find it. They will not be thanked by our leadership elite (or most of their readers) for adhering to the demands of their chosen profession, i.e. good substantive journalism.
In small measure, your entry redresses that little injustice.
Commenters try to pin culpability for Bullard’s hate speech on to the ST’s editorial team. Their reasoning is flawed. Bullard held a senior position, was respected as such and was treated accordingly. He enjoyed, I assume, the latitude afforded senior members of any journalistic institution, i.e. an editorial freedom over which he was trusted to exercise due restraint.
He betrayed that trust and paid the price.
Comments to which I would be unable to adequately respond include those written by people unable to see just how deeply offensive and racist Bullard’s last column for the ST was (such as ‘Afrikaner’ above). Perhaps they should reread it, looking not for snide racism but for the glaring worldview of white supremacy informing it.
‘Afrikaner’ might not get it, but I’m sure Mondli Makhanya knows all too well that, just as the United States ‘gave’ more than freedom and democracy to Iraq, colonialism ‘gave’ far more than technological trinkets to Africa and our benighted globe.
It is that appreciation which continues to make Makhanya’s (and many of his journalists’) work compelling, informative, and thought provoking. Is through journalists like Makhanya that our Dave Bullards are revealed.
Luddite please could you supply us with a list of what should or should not be debated. Would I be right in saying that anything that runs contrary to your views is not worthy of debate? A great fascist/socialist outlook if ever. I’m sure Snuki of SABC fame must be a role model.
I guess now is the time to start worrying about the people that have been sitting in your lectures of “media ethics and economics journalism at Rhodes University”.
Hopefully the majority of them has developed afterwards what you apparently are missing …
Btw: pretending to be the opposite of a coconut, doesn’t make you one …
If colonialism was the original sin in Africa without redeeming features of any kind, then what objection (aside from his last sentence) could “progressives” or Africanists or those aligned with BCM and Azapo have to the bulk of Bullard’s last column? Given the failing struggle Africa has had with modernity, perhaps Africa and Africans should have been left alone to find their own path? In other words, Africa for the Africans. Bullard is merely showing up the reverse reflection of the views of many educated South Africans who align with the above schools of thought, and the current Africanist hegemonic thought in the ANC. But of course when such a discourse is filtered through Bullard’s lenses its “racist”, but when the same sentiment is stated from more acceptable quarters in today’s South Africa, it may be considered otherwise.
Of course the trusty old race card just has to be brandished at every opportunity and what better excuse to brand whites as racist than this article of Dave Bullard?
However, I do see some black racist sentiment in these comments - whites this, whites that, white supremecists etc. Then of course true to form, we have our liberal brigade, who as usual, are engaged in a frenetic self-flaggeratory orgy to see who can feel the most guilty for being white in their terminal pursuit of permanent penance for Apartheid.
How was the attack on David Bullard in his home, his sanctuary, by blacks not racist? How was the brutal torture, rape and murder of that lovely young woman Estee van Rensburg by blacks in her home, her sanctuary, not racist? How was the shooting in front of his family of Mr. Picton-Turberville by blacks in his home, his sanctuary, not racist?
In South Africa, white racism manifests in speaking the truth about black failure which is self evident in every facet of our lives from power failure to failure to confront Mugabe.
Black racism however manifests in the brutalisation, rape and murder of white people of which Bullard and his wife were only two in an attack that could have been much worse.
The double standards in South Africa stink!
Well, my first response is that the ST is probably losing its most able writer. Under Haffagee the standard of reportage in the M&G has improved. Under Makanya the standard of the ST has declined from an already low base. Like or hate Bullard he was at least a skilled writer. (not something I could say about the writer/s of this article - and yes, I do speak from a position which makes me fit to comment.)
The basis of good satire is that it should contain an element of truth. A mature self-confident society laughs at it - whether it be an Anglican bishop shown the LIFE OF BRIAN or Bertie O’Hearn told an Irish joke. To react simply establishes that the satire is accurate, and that the victim lacks the self-confidence to deal with it. Bullard committed the cardinal sin not of racism (Africa’s trump card and last resort of scoundrels) but the sin of not being politically correct - the basic points 1)Black Africans are settlers, 2)without colonisation Africa would still be an iron age society (as Europe, Japan, and numerous disperate societies did move of their own accord, it could have moved out of this eventually. But it was several thousand years back on a known track of societal evolution) 3)The ‘blame colonialism culture’ underlies Africa’s inability to move forward (until politicians are accountable it cannot realise its potential) might all be unpalatable facts but they’re all substatiable facts. I know it is cruel to immature, insecure people to rub their noses in these facts, which they’d rather turn a blind eye to — despite the fact that doing so causes terrible suffering. But if Africa is going to grow up and achieve what it can - it needs to accept these unpalatable things and deal with them. Denial simply perpetuates the situation and makes it worse. Firing Bullard was shooting the messenger.
1)(rolls eyes) It’s not preposerous. All SA newspapers are sweetheart press to vested interests of some sort. Some less so than others - M&G again, but none could be described as not giving in to pressure at some time in their history. Once true, repeatably true.
2) What utter drivel. There is no limitation on how many people may be subjected to free-speech. See ‘freedom of association’ and remember the days when more than three people was a riot. According to your logic the cartoons of Mohammed would have been just fine if only three people ever saw them. You are a gift press freedom, both of you.
3)Yes, he would say that wouldn’t he? To admit pressure was brought to bear would be career suicide. I’m afraid rather like the need to hide the ballot results in Zim, this is ‘guilty until proven innocent.’ If he had stopped the article _before_ publication (and that is an editor’s job) and then fired Bullard THEN this would be credible. Otherwise it is simply unbelievable.
4) (Roar of laughter) That has to be your silliest argument yet. “The man with the bloody axe in hand leaning over his enemy said ‘I didn’t do it.’ Therefore, despite all the other supporting evidence and motive, we must acquit this man.” To admit he was pressured would be career suicide. Therefore he had no choice but to say that. Therefore his testimony is worthless.
5)Probably will. Who cares? I only read it by accident.
It is sickening to see how people in high positions always find a scapegoat for their own wrong-doings. The issue here is that the editor of the Sunday Times should resign or be kicked out, not David. The editor has obviously not enough control systems in place to see that what is not “fitting” for the ST does not get published. You are a coward and shame on you. the coward!
I am not too familiar with editorial process, but surely this article would have landed on someone’s desk before going to print.
I completely agree with an employer’s (or designated individual representing the employer’s interests) right to dismissal. However it seems clear that this dimissal could be deemed unfair. At no point was the employer obliged to publish this particular article. Formal disciplinary procedures could have been followed without publication. To publish and then dismiss, on what I assume are “damage to commercial interests from the publication of the article” grounds, is not the correct path to follow. Unless David Bullard has been given the autonomy to e-mail his column straight through to the printers.
I eagerly await the findings of the arbitrator or the labour court.
It may also be possible to find individuals higher up the editorial chain guilty of gross negligence, amongst others. This action might have to be brought by a member of Joe Public, as I doubt it would be driven internally.
Perhaps David Bullard should join the FBJ, and acquire their solidarity. They take whites on nowadays, you know. Perhaps, for safety sake, he should take a mtDNA sample with, to prove the phenotypic relation to “mitochodrian Eve”.
Of course the nature of the relationship between the publication and David Bullard might well be contractual. If this is the case there will be termination or performance clauses that allow for the dismisal. However I would pay good money to see this challenged.
Save David Bullard. I don’t think so. He seems big enough and ugly enough to fight his own battles.
Air Avusa’s dirty laundry. Now that’s something we should all be entitled to see.
Doug from Holfontein on April 13th, 2008 at 10:05 am
Anyone who has ever shared a brimming trough with David Bullard would know that he doesn’t just tilt at windmills, he ravages them. His humour, knowledge of the markets and searing ability to spot a phony have made him a national treasure, albeit imported (like his single malts and virgin-thigh-rolled cigars). Pre-shooting he was just as funny, ascerbic and politically way so incorrect. Those fools didn’t shoot him in the head, and saved for posterity a writer South Africa should worship. To be fired by an editor on Thursday for a piece that ran on Sunday and was submitted on Thursday simply shows the way of the new editorial order. It is the editor who should fall on his BEE sword. He drinks (copiously) from the trough, but doesn’t attend it enough.
This column is hardly racist.
It pretty much paraphrases what is in the book “Guns, Germs, and Steel” by Jared Diamond. Simply put the column points out that South Africa was going to be colonized no matter what. The Bantu were conquered by Europeans who had guns and steel. A stronger civilization will displace a weaker one. The fact is that the Bantu (blacks) had just conquered/displaced the Koi-San. The Koi-San were still hunter gatherers and the Bantu had agriculture.
That’s not racist. The Bantu civilization was never going to survive contact with a more advanced civilization.
If the Bantu were left alone, which was never going to happen – South Africa under Bantu civilization represents a power vacuum that has to be filled, then without doubt they would be conquered sooner or later.
How they would do/have done/responded if another civilization did the conquering is pure speculation. Like novels in which Germany wins WWII.
You cannot fire people for pointing out the obvious.
There’s still a bunch of DB’s that are awaiting elimination without any remorse. Thanks GOD not all the apples are rotten, we still have the sober minded Roberts.
No excuses about his attacks, he’s always been ironic, it’s only now that he came out of the closet.
You know what? he will soon be smoking that Ciggar out to lunch with those like him.
Brand and Taylor seem very confident about the reasons for Bullard’s sacking. Perhaps they should attend more Joburg cocktail parties; the issue with ST management has been rumbling for months. A more interesting question to ask is: if the editor did not see it, who let this piece through? Did anyone read it before it went to some underpaid, overworked subeditor?
It really is very convenient that an annoying thorn in the flesh should write exactly the kind of article that gets him fired for a reason with which no right-thinking South African could disagree.
Call a man a racist and you can do anything to him. You don’t have to pay any attention to what he said, because what he wrote is tainted, evil, polluted, and your lily white liberal credentials could get stained with racism if you even read it. For our next lesson: how to identify witches.
John D Rockerfeller on April 14th, 2008 at 8:05 am
Ndumiso Ngcobo was proposing a coconut witch hunt just the other day. I propose another test for coconuts: hook them up to a brain scanning device, show them a picture of David Bullard and examine which areas of the brain light up. If the response is not entirely negative, it can be concluded that there are dangerous coconut tendencies and ideological realignment will be required.
I’m surprised there’s such a hoo-hah about David Bullard. ST demoted him to the front page of the business segment which cut readership to LSM 8+ only - a kind of elite wilderness, pandering only to humourless accountants and actuaries, which left Fred Khumalo in populist ST centre stage (and Fred cruelly rubbed it in with some glee) . If you ask me DB was just seeing how far he could push his luck, before he got his “storm in a teacup” DCM (don’t come Monday). The ensuing controversy has ensured his desirability to the Baked Bean Brigade.
A coconut witch hunt is a brilliant idea. Traditional healers could adapt the Salem sniffing out methods and apply these to modern day SA. Suspected Coconuts would be dunked in the sea - preferably at Snake Park beach where all the voodoo rituals are performed. If the suspect floats and strikes out for Australia in a measured breast stroke - he’s a coconut for sure (or maybe one of the Shaik brothers). If the suspect sinks like a fisherman’s lead sinker, he’s an African’s African
In this week’s Sunday Times Mondli Makhanya takes full responsibility for the publication of the offending column. He states that their systems failed but, as editor, the buck stops with him and he takes full responsibility. Whether there is anything more to it than that I don’t know and judging by the comments here and elsewhere, neither does anyone else. There is only speculation. Entertaining speculation, but only speculation nevertheless.
As I mentioned in another post by Alex Forest. I thought DB’s piece was childish and spiteful. I was offended but I exercised my democratic right to move on to something else. DB is a talented writer and I often enjoyed his columns and his turn of phrase, even when I didn’t agree with him.
I think he was way off the mark with his most recent attempt but I would much rather have seen other able writers do public battle with him than see him fired. As it is, he can now claim to be a victim. Instead, we could have seen his views being put to the test.
Satire, grim humour!!!!! many a true word said in jest????
The different races in SA still creep around each other nervous to tell ‘our’ truths. One way is to stir up a storm by upsetting all the tight lipped old Biddies and getting an honest and fierce debate going. DB’s article, whilst not good, did just this.
So if good/great is the yardstick of what gets printed or not we will have very little to read.
Interesting, that some people keep mentioning that “after David’s attack, he became a racist monster.”
Any guesses as to how many people this is happening to on a daily basis, and i am obviously not only alluding to whites only. Many people are becoming victims of crime, and are turning racist.
The only difference here, is that David Bullard had a platform to articulate his feelings and his viewpoints, which obviously changed since his attack.
Imagine for a moment that everyone who has been a victim of crime could wrte articles for the Sunday Times.
To all those whiners quoting Orwell and citing censorship:
I’d like to know how many Letters to the Editor you wrote or anti-censorship protests you took part in 15+ years ago? The firing of 1 boring, insensitive writer is hardly a landmark event on a slight to fascism/socialism/Sino-Soviet communist republic/Zimbabwe (it’s difficult to keep up with the fear-mongers as to which dreadful future we are imminently about to become).
To all those pro-colonialist:
Arguing through counter-factuals is always a terribly weak argument. No one is arguing against the beneficial by-products of the system. However, they should not be used as a justification for a system of oppression. In a similar way that Nazi Germany made many contributions to the modern world (rocketry, jet-propulsion, numerous medical advances, and the Olympic torch relay), but no one would dare use them to justify that regime.
The Sunday Times was always a mediocre paper but at last they have finally done something right.
Your statement “David Bullard is a racist” needs to be examined. Did it take 14 years to discover this? If so, then who is more liable, Bullard or the person who employed Bullard? He is not a racist, but he sometimes - often - makes racially sensitive remarks. That was his job.
Once again, Mondli Makhanya shows his courage, integrity and commitment to constitutional values. Good on him for not allowing an impoverished understanding of freedom of speech to undermine decent journalism. Good on Robert and Anne for bringing sanity to this online debate.
I myself think very little of white racists, especially afrikanners. They think they are gods and superior to any other race…They still hold our economy because of the inheritance from their forefathers of the apartheid era.
“That’s my opinion but if I were to write that on any of my official reports, I’d definitely get axed, whether my supervisor was also negligent in just signing off without checking the political correctness.
People should refrain from writing stupid articles.”
This is one person reacting somwhere above me. It is a (to use a term very often bandied about) rabidly racist opinion? Why are people allowed to say things like this on Thoughtleader? I am an Afrikaner and I take offense. For damn sure.
Anyway - Bullard was out of line, but Makhanya was incompetent for not reading his most controversial columnist’s work. Editors should not be incompetent.
Thanks for the responses to this post. A few comments:
We were mistaken when we said David Bullard was fired from the Sunday Times. His column was axed. There’s an important difference.
Thanks for pointing out Bullard’s deteriorating mindset since last year’s shooting. It does seem that he became more bitter and angrier. But I stand by the argument that although many of us may think racist thoughts, that doesn’t give us the right to publish them in a newspaper.
Many commentators are hinting at “management” issues and interferences. Could someone from Avusa let us know what’s going on? If there is a conspiracy, then surely it should be exposed? Evidence, please.
Look, I’m not trying to imply things were rosy between Bullard and Avusa. But the closest I’ve got to finding out what really happened is from someone who is pretty close to the editorial process. He insists that while Avusa may indeed have wanted to get rid of Bullard, Makhanya acted independently to axe his column as he believed it was racist.
And, lastly, I definitely agree that it was calamitous that the column was not pulled before it was published. Mondli has admitted that the editorial systems failed. As editor, he is responsible for everything in his newspaper. So, yes, that was a mistake that I am sure the editorial staff at the Sunday Times all regret.
I think I largely agree with Robert and Anne, but there is that one question I’d like to have them answer: Was it fair of the editor to a column and then fire the columnist afterwards? The difference with the Qwelane case is that editors can’t stop radio journalists from making certain comments live on air, whereas newspaper editors can refuse to publish certain articles. In this respect, at least, Tim du Plessis has set an earlier good example: When Dan Roodt offered a racist column for publication, Du Plessis refused to publish it AND fires Roodt. (By the way, I see Roodt is one of those demanding that Bullard be reinstated.)
Very suprised that none of your correspondents brought up the fact that David Bullard was shot in his home last year - do you all just forget about this type of thing!!
WHO SHOT DAVID BULLARD WITH A GUN?
Did the bullets hit him? Yes
Could he have been killed? Yes
Why did they shoot him? No-one knows
Who is investigating his shooting? No-one knows
Who shot him????????
You guys just don’t get the big picture. Wether DB was good, bad, irritating or in most peoples opinion racist is still no reason for firing. For your info he was just as irritating to ‘white’ rulers/leaders and thus for him to hold back on Black leaders would be racism as this would mean he thought less of them.
A lesson from Rhodesia/Zim to illistrate why it is dangerous to get rid of irritating un-loved writers.
Peter Neusiwant (spelling?) was the Wests media hero in +- 1978/9 as he fought Smith to publish the truth about what was going on in the war there - in fact he won numerous awards and Smith’s gang were forced to back down by world pressure.
Less than 3 years after that Bob M issued an order forbidding publication of the fact that the N. Korean’s were traning the 5th Brigade. A courageous women editor of the Umtali Times ignored Bob and published this TRUTH. The results:
- Umtali Times closed down and said editor out of job - bet no one can remember her name!!!!
- deafening silence woldwide
- Bob continues on his way and we know the result now
Most dictators start with small deeds, that get bigger and bigger as they get bolder as no one does anything
Well-intentioned people like Robert Brand and Anne Taylor do not seem to understand that there is no logical limit to censorship. Find it ‘right’ or ‘acceptable’ to censor or ban or punish one opinion today and you have no grounds left to object to censoring and banning another opinion tomorrow, which you may not be so hot to agree with.
When did the idea that people should be coerced for their beliefs first enter the world? Where has it ever produced more good than harm down the ages?
Axeing DB has been a desperately sorry episode for all concerned, stirring prejudice and duplicity, hate and sanctimoniousness in equal proportions. Above, Anne even sees an important difference between firing DB and ending his column. That is a defence of the editor and management, an explanation of what happened?
SA’s ‘democracy’ has far to go, as do our tolerance and understanding of each other.
I’m in total agreement, it was irresponsible journalism at best. Even worse, it was a bad peice of writing, probably conceived in a post whiskey and cigar binge stupor. Farewell David and good riddance.
Makhanya claims a ’special relaltionship’ with columnists. Nonsense, it only means he abdicated responsibility in his duties as editor in chief. Did none of the sub-editors, wip, proof readers, news editors, copy editors, pick up on the supposed problem? At the end of the day, Makhanya is supposed to sign off on copy before it goes to production. Is he actually capable of doing the job, or is he just window dressing? Bullards article did not appear on the page by magic.
@nijowa
What a coincidence. My cousin was also shot in his home last year. Very suprised that none of your correspondents brought up the fact that my cousin was shot in his home last year - do you all just forget about this type of thing!!
WHO SHOT MY COUSIN WITH A GUN?
Did the bullets hit him? Yes
Could he have been killed? Yes
Why did they shoot him? No-one knows
Who is investigating his shooting? No-one knows
Who shot him????????
The chickens had come home to roost with the Sunday Times.’Hitler’ views showcased a National Newspaper!! Laughable? No insulting all other nations including whites.No human being could support trash.Sunday Times woke up late!! They fought JZ (they still owe him by the way) back to back with his staffer little did they know that he was seeing them as baby-makers like Zuma…..What an insults!! Now we know that we still have such people in Newspaper!! They are the ones (claimed majority) fighting for Media independence against black Journos and want the Scorpions intact!! Hey Sunday Times will realise late as to why they want Scorpions like they did now with the recent statements.There are Blacks and Whites who love this country!!!They will die for it side by side! To hell with lunatics.Alunta!!!
Some people here are not encouraging the right use of their own minds really.
I am black and I loved David’s column a lot but I slowly started to hate his it shortly after he was shot. Why he increasinly continued impartiality and blatantly submitted racist articles so he was putting the Paper on the spot and someone had to deal with that.
Concerning point 6, “Playing the sense of humour card is no different to playing the race card.” Does that mean that we’ll see more local comedians taken to the SAHRC just because someone can’t handle fantasy?
Bullard definately overstepped the mark, his piece came across shabby and badly researched. One can take into account that bullard is a tongue in cheek columnist and that his satiristic writing has been accepted and of course the freedom of expression argument can be taken into account, the more important question however should be, why did the subs and editor not pick up the problem before going to print? This is after all procedure. Is it viable to say there is more than one person to blame for the publication of the piece? Should it have been allowed to go to print in the first place?
I don’t know what the editorial policy for the Sunday Times is but I suspect that different rules apply for columnists. Columns are not the same as a news articles which can held up against the objectivity yardstick and scoured for legal gremlins. It’s an opinion piece. Few sub-editors are going to stand up and say, “Er, David, I don’t like your opinion in this one, perhaps you could write another … and can you do it in the three hours we have left before we go to print?” As a columnist, he’s expected to police himself. In his apology, he talks about reading the distressed replies to the column, not just raised hackles, but genuine voices of hurt There were surely such responses to earlier columns and these should have been taken as warning signs that his portrayals were becoming deeply offensive. He occupies this privileged position because the editor trusts that he’ll do this. By apologising Bullard practically confesses to abusing that trust.
Did the Makhanya only find out what was in Bullard’s article after it became a public issue? Or was he fired for writing something that was approved by the editorial team? Seems as though Makhanya bowed to some pressure… A column designed to spark controversy and that is funny is a good thing, but where is humor a prerequisite for political/social criticism??? So jump up onto your high horses and scream racist, Bullard knows he’s right and so do those of us with functioning grey matter and a lack of the amazing faculty to bend over forwards, backwards and sideways to please the ANC. Or, for that matter, any other blacks in power who don’t deserve it and thus make doubly sure that no-one gainsays them… I pity you hand-puppets. History is written by the victors mayhaps, but that only changes the history textbooks not the actual facts…
All comments must be approved by our editors, click here to read the editorial guidelines for comments. Please allow some time for our editors to approve your comment after posting.
profile
Robert Brand teaches media ethics and economics journalism at Rhodes University. Before joining academia, he worked as a journalist for the Pretoria News, the Star and Bloomberg News.
Some journalists believe that President Jacob Zuma's inauguration speech signalled a thaw in his relationship with the media. But actions speak louder...
I am getting just a little bit irritated by food retailers who shed crocodile tears over the difficulties of their cash-strapped customers, while raki...
Can someone explain to me why South Africa needs 31 Cabinet ministers? According to The Times, Jacob Zuma is planning to enlarge the Cabinet from 28 t...
The Rocky Mountain News, Cincinnati Post and New York Sun are gone. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer published its last edition on Tuesday. The San Fran...
I cant help feeling sorry for Carl Niehaus. Not that anything can excuse the mans behaviour, but you have to understand where he's coming from. Nieh...
Loading ...
I support freedom of speech, whether I agree with what that person says or not. Clearly the idea of free speech has not been well understood in Africa, given the current suppression of it in many countries to the north of us, and its suppression in the past in this country. I firmly believe that any censorship suffocates the conversation and exchange that we should be having between people with differing viewpoints. It is only by confronting these varying viewpoints head on and dealing with them directly, instead of suppressing them or wishing them away, that we can progress. However, there is also a thing called tactfulness that people also seem to forget in their brash tirades - and such a tone tends to immediately close many peoples’ minds to the actual message the writer or speaker is trying to make. My main point is that lets not shy away from these issues, or silence each other, but lets approach them in a respectful way with meaningful dialogue. Lets begin this conversation!
(Report abuse)