Correspondence: Elizabeth Wayne
Correspondence: Elizabeth Wayne: RE: Deborah Patta / 3rd Degree alleged “failure to present stories in a manner consistent with journalism's code of ethics” From: Elizabeth Wayne [mailto:email@example.com] Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 1:41 PM To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Debora Patta Email Correspondence
Dear Ms. Johnstone, I am a third year university student, and have been working on a research project concerning fair media and journalism ethics. Recently, my research has led me to some complaints against 3rd Degree, the ETV show produced and hosted by Debora Patta. These cases all accuse Patta of violating media ethics by distorting the stories presented, through editing and lack of contextualization. One of Ms. Patta's responses to these claims has been that 3rd Degree is not a news programme, it is a current affairs programme, and thus not obligated to the same level of stringency in portraying the stories. According to her argument, a current affairs programme may present opinions and commentary, rather than an unbiased, honest, contextualized presentation of a news story. I came across your February-July 2010 correspondence with Ms. Patta that has been posted on Scribd (http://www.scribd.com/doc/27741647/10-02-22-ETV-3rd-Degree-Exec-ProducerDebora-Patta-Official-Comment-on-Radical-Honesty-White-Refugee-Free-Speech-LegalIssue). While the entire situation was another example of the dismal state of media ethics, I was particularly intrigued by Ms. Patta's e-mail on March 3rd, 2010 at 8:49am. Patta wrote: “Thanks for your mail. 3rd degree is an investigative current affairs programme not a public elected body with a responsibility to comment on issues. All comment from e.news and current affairs falls under the head of news as pointed out in a previous e-mail.” According to this statement, Ms. Patta is calling 3rd Degree "news", which would then mean the program is bound to news ethical codes (such as honesty and contextualization). Since my research is being advised by several law professors and I am also working with some non-governmental organizations interested in Ms. Patta's failure to present stories in a manner consistent with journalism's code of ethics, I was hoping that you would be willing to provide an affidavit that Patta's e-mail on March 3rd, 2010 at 8:49am did say the above quoted text, and that you did not alter that text in any way before posting it on the Scribd site. Proving that Patta made the above quoted statement could be key in disproving her own argument that 3rd Degree need not abide by the of virtue of honesty. Sincerely, Elizabeth Wayne Tel: (072) 061 3270 E-mail: email@example.com From: Lara Johnstone [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: Monday, August 29, 2011 1:18 AM
Correspondence: Elizabeth Wayne To: 'Elizabeth Wayne' Cc: 3RD Degree ETV (email@example.com); Debora Patta ETV (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: RE: Debora Patta Email Correspondence Ms. Wayne, Is this a joke? The quote is verbatim from the email from Ms. Patta. “Thanks for your mail. 3rd degree is an investigative current affairs programme not a public elected body with a responsibility to comment on issues. All comment from e.news and current affairs falls under the head of news as pointed out in a previous email.” You say: “According to this statement, Ms. Patta is calling 3rd Degree "news", which would then mean the program is bound to news ethical codes (such as honesty and contextualization). “ rd Where exactly did Ms. Patta state that 3 Degree is “news”?
I have no idea how either you or Ms. Pata define news; and I don’t see why I should provide you with an affidavit. To submit to what authority or officials? What the fuck for? To wipe your ass with? Ms Patta is hardly the only intellectual prostitute in SA; so why focus on her only? If you have no interest in impartiality of holding all intellectual prostitute journalists in SA accountable; please fuck off with your witchhunt. Lara