The article in The Racegoer section of The Mercury of 19 October written by David Thiselton and entitled “Levelling the playing fields” refers.
At the outset, let me declare my interests. I have been involved in the horseracing industry for over forty years and am a past employee of Gold Circle having served as the General Manager of the Clairwood Turf Club for sixteen years. In the past thirteen years I have acted as consultant to both Gold Circle and Phumelela and to other sectors of the industry. At the present time I consult to a leading brand in the Bookmaking Industry and I admit to wearing a purple cap firmly on my head. However, I have no axe to grind and consider myself a supporter of the horseracing industry as a whole. However, enough is enough……..
Over the past few months there has been a concentrated and co-ordinated propaganda campaign by both Racing Operators (Phumelela and Gold Circle) against Bookmakers and a relentless diatribe suggesting that Bookmaking has an unfair advantage and makes an insufficient and disproportionate contribution to the sport of horseracing. Many of the assertions are unfounded and some may even be regarded as disingenuous – but I have no intention of responding to those assertions here. Fortunately, there will be an appropriate opportunity for both sides (Racing Operators and Bookmakers) to make their submissions to the Public Hearings of the Parliamentary Committee on 28 October and 2 November. After that, there will be ample time to wipe the metaphoric egg off any faces.
So sir, what is my problem? My problem is that I like fair play. My problem is that I like transparency. My problem is that I find devious and misleading dissemination of information as distasteful. My problem is that (naturally) Mr Thiselton does not disclose to his (and your) readers that he is the paid servant of Gold Circle and that he does the bidding of Gold Circle. My problem is that Gold Circle does not disclose to your readers that the Racegoer section is “bought space” in your newspaper and my problem is that you sir, are a party to allowing your readers to mistakenly believe that Mr Thiselton’s article is independent reporting and/or independent opinion. Of course, the discerning reader may question the credibility of the article as there is a basic component of good journalism missing – the other side’s point of view. Here is an interesting question – if the Bookmakers (including my client) wished to rebut what Mr Thiselton has written, would they be given equivalent space in your newspaper without having to pay for it?
I have no problem with the Operators buying space in national newspapers to promote the sport of horse racing in order to communicate essential information and newsworthy editorial that in the past used to be available for free. It is commendable – although, somewhat sad. What I do take exception to is the blatant misuse of that facility. If Gold Circle wants to communicate its point of view without rebuttal and without the slightest inkling of balance, then let them state clearly that the tirade is “advertorial” or let them simply buy normal advertising space.
This is not the first time that Mr Thiselton has used his purchased platform to deliver a sorry excuse for journalism – and I really wish you would stop it from happening again. In a climate where all fair minded and democratic South Africans are actively campaigning against the Protection of Information Bill and standing squarely alongside our journalists in their quest to tell the truth and to be allowed to deliver balanced news, I can only say “shame on you Mr Thiselton, shame on you Gold Circle and shame on The Mercury”.
BASIL THOMAS
