The Cape Town Press Club has become a classic case of how an organisation with a long and proud history can be captured by an ambitious minority membership. The big question is what do they want to use the club for?
Founded in 1976, the club is the oldest organisation of its kind in the country, with the main objective of bringing members of the media together for a lunch to network and engage with interesting and newsworthy speakers. It was formed at a time when the country operated under a hierarchical system and the club served to cut through the red tape and other obstacles faced by journalists to report or question those in power.
It served that purpose well.
During the 1970s, 1980s and the early 1990s, whenever the club had a meeting the editors of the major newspapers would attend so they could sit at the main table to know and network with the speaker of the day.
But the world has changed. South Africa has transitioned into a constitutional democracy. The advent of social media and the re-modelling of the media landscape caused significant changes in the behaviour and manner of journalism praxis.
The lack of transformation at the club was not just about race, or gender, but also coming to terms with overall transformation. Reporters literally have to write and publish more with less.
The push in these times for immediate breaking news means organisations like the Cape Town Press Club do not feature as part of a working reporter’s tool box.
When I joined the club, I was also on the committee of the Parliamentary Press Gallery Association and saw the potential of the two organisations working together to afford journalists the opportunity to get better access to news makers.
My reason for leaving the club arose over the manipulation that manifested itself at its most recent annual general meeting (AGM), and the manner in which the current committee has behaved since then.
The issue started with the appointment of Donwald Pressly as the secretary in 2015 after he lost his job with Independent Media. The post he held was the only paid one as it involves significant time spent in administration and in support of the executive committee. It is an employee position with no voting rights.
The secretary, who attends committee meetings, ultimately does what the committee decides, regardless whether he or she agrees. This is normal practice for organisations such as the Press Club, a voluntary organisation.
Pressly’s appointment was approved following his proposal that, as a past chairperson and long-standing member, he “best knows” how the club functions. A sub-committee of which I was part was formed to examine the proposal. I supported his appointment because I believed he could do the job and would serve the interests of the club and its members. The committee agreed to the appointment, but it was not unanimous and led to the resignation of one committee member.
At first all was good and well. However, I felt that Pressly increasingly confused his role as a paid employee with that of a committee member.
Other aspects of his conduct also started raising red flags. The real breaking point came when I was asked by Parliament to help inform journalists of the Press Club about a report-back by the legislature. I consulted other committee members because it is practice not to advertise non-Press Club events, but not a policy
Although I obtained the agreement of my then-co-chair Brent Meersman and other committee members to go ahead with the engagement with Parliament, Pressly flatly refused to assist.
When I asked him to do so on the committee WhatsApp group he went on a rant against me over a period of six hours, necessitating the intervention of two other committee members to get him to stop.
The Press Club WhatsApp conversation, or rant, against me, was then leaked to Parliament. The leaked conversation, particularly Pressly’s comments, brought the club into disrepute and the sharp end of criticism by Parliament, which issued a statement in November 2017, raising its concern about the “vitriolic attacks” by Pressly on the presiding officers.
How that WhatsAspp conversation was leaked, I don’t know.
The Cape Town Press Club is not immune from such a situation and as a point of principle has always operated in an atmosphere of transparency, just as it demands from those who are in power in government and in business.
I was present at the meeting requested by members of the club outside the committee to mediate a solution on Pressly’s future. The result was a proposal that Pressly would resign as secretary with at least four months’ pay, but he would retain his membership.
In terms of the club’s constitition and practice, this proposal had to be formally adopted and approved by the committee. This was done and Pressly resigned as secretary in January.
Unknown to some in the previous committee was that there has been intense behind-the-scenes lobbying in the months since. The aim of Pressly and his grouping was clearly to control the club again. This was done by sleight of hand, and not in keeping with the club’s practices that, for example, include giving notice of intention to stand for a committee position. By a careful reading the constitution the whole election coup of Pressly was unconstitutional.
To the surprise of some previous committee members, on the day of the AGM there was a long list of new candidates, led by Pressly. The AGM sanctioned Pressly’s list of candidates, as Meersman informed the outgoing committee there could be no nominations from the floor.
I would like to point out that Ed Herbst, in his opinion piece - “A fake news attack on the Cape Town Press Club”, dated August 24 - comes to a wrong and utterly disturbing conclusion (which according to Herbst was approved by Meersman and Pressly): “Speaking for myself what I, rightly or wrongly, glean from this is that Van Wyk served happily on the committee of the Cape Town Press Club until it was pointed out to her that she was no longer eligible for appointment to it because, not having paid her subs for two years, she was no longer a member in good standing,” he wrote.
This is incorrect as I was a member of good standing at the time of the AGM and I met all the requirements in terms of the clubs rules to be nominated from the floor.
And so Pressly and his allies were elected unopposed.
The result is an all-white committee that is heavily biased in favour of the Cape Messenger, with its editor and other stakeholders on the committee of the club. The new committee has not been transparent in what it wants to do with the Cape Town Press Club.
* Van Wyk is the former co-chairperson of the Cape Town Press Club and is parliamentary correspondent for Landbouweekblad. She writes this in her personal capacity.
* This piece first appeared in Politicsweb as the right of reply to a piece by Ed Herbst.