We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
SOUTH AFRICAN MEDIA has today defied a government warning and splashed pictures of President Jacob Zuma’s private home which was controversially revamped using millions of dollars of taxpayers money.
State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele had yesterday warned media to stop publishing photographs or footage of Zuma’s rural home, arguing that doing so was in violation of security laws.
“No one including those in the media, is allowed to take images and publicise images even pointing where the possible security features are,” he said.
“It is not done anywhere. We have not seen the images of the White House showing where the security features are. It is not done in any democracy,” said Cwele.
But newspapers ignored the warning and today splashed on their front pages pictures of Zuma’s lavishly-refurbished homestead, photographs that have previously run in the media with no government repercussions.
The Times had on its front page an aerial picture of the thatched-roof compound under the headline “So, arrest us”.
The Star also had a picture of the homestead, but with a red X imposed across it and a caption “Look away! What ministers don’t want you to see”.
The editors’ association said it was “disappointed and shocked” at Thursday’s order.
It vowed to continue publishing the pictures, “not with the intention to endanger the life of anyone, but to continue our role as watchdogs of public expenditure,” said Adriaan Basson of the South African National Editors’ Forum.
“We believe it is of immense public interest to keep on reporting this grotesque public expenditure of over 200-million-rand on the private residence of a sitting president,” Basson told AFP.
The government’s decision to spend over 20 million dollars of taxpayer money to revamp Zuma’s private property has sparked public anger amid an economic crunch in a country where 10 million people live on social grants and many have only tin shacks for their homes.
The splurge in the verdant hills of Zuma’s political stronghold was first publicised late last year.
The security upgrade to Zuma’s house in rural Nkandla in the eastern province of KwaZulu-Natal included a helipad, underground bunkers, fencing and a clinic.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
The competition is open to any startup less than 3 years in operation with up to 1 million in funding already received . ( as if €25 000. , is going to make that much of a difference to them , compared to a new start up starved of funding and cash to get going …)
Under €1million in funding. U could have received nothing and still win it. Quit spamming the article and talking bollocks
Previous winners have secured millions in funding . Then perhaps this prize should go to individuals or companies trying to get started with a good idea . the money and pr would mean so much more ….
That not what it is and they secured their funding like all VC after developing their idea
They secured millions AFTER winning the prize.
It points out that (a) the competition chooses companies that indeed have lots of potential and (b) winning the prize is good publicity and is a great recommendation for potential investors.
Try using your brain before criticising
have your say