Coverage of DA's march was biased: iLIVE
Your coverage of the DA march on Cosatu House left me with mixed feelings.
The background analytical piece by S'thembiso Msomi ("DA shot itself in the foot") was thought-provoking and raised some important issues of substance.
I saw some of the coverage of the march on TV. It was clear that missiles were thrown by both sides. Indeed, one of the victims of these actions, Mail & Guardian journalist Nickolaus Bauer, stated on TV that rocks were being thrown by both DA and Cosatu supporters, yet your coverage creates the impression that the violence involved only Cosatu supporters.
While it is legitimate and correct to condemn the violence, it is not acceptable to give such a biased account of what was clearly a more complicated situation.
This is the type of coverage that leads many poor people to believe, fairly or unfairly, that the commercial media pursues the agenda of the rich and powerful.
Little is said about the failure of police to put in place measures to ensure that what was a highly charged situation did not end in this predictable way. Little is also said about the DA's insistence on marching on Cosatu HQ, despite the local authority ruling that it should march to a neutral venue.
I am not justifying the violent conduct, but we do expect more professional and objective reporting from a serious newspaper.