Roper’s drunken stupor confirms more than meandering slurred speech, but a racist mind.
Chris Roper on the 22 October 2018 penned an article saturated in vitriol and seething in overzealous anger. Let us try to understand his mind in what is an emotional rant anchored with conclusive claims in which he framed the owner of Sekunjalo, that owns Independent Media, chairperson Dr. Iqbal Survé.
Roper’s accusation floats from being a spokesman of an apparent group of junior reporters attached to a fake investigations unit at Independent, who he claims “will now struggle ever to get a job”, a categorical assertion that Survé singularly has contributed to the erosion of trust in our media. He dovetails this with his prophetic utterances of a collapsing business empire, in which he accuses Survé of seeking to make reflections.
Roper’s meandering drunken stagger leads him up an alley of the media-created state capture crime, yet to be proven in any judicial setting. He attempts to postulate in the frame of convenient salacious media capture, the same he, in a sense of colloquial and ease of use of a Gupta punching bag, seeks to straitjacket Survé in as well. One is not sure of his confirmed assertions of parallelism of the infamous Gupta name, the family SA in Pavlov’s theory is classically conditioned and brow-beaten to hate. We know that Gupta inculcates a prolific economy for those who depend on Gupta hate for their individual and group interest relevance in political, academic, clerical, civil society and business expressions.
Roper then drapes Survé with an accusation of being responsible for what he dubs “more disinformation campaigns”. As if that was not enough, a heavily inebriated Roper finally vomits twin accusations of ‘divided opinion on race’ and; “more crude opinion pieces run on front pages of the Independent publications formerly known as newspapers.’’
Typical of sloshed tongues and hearts they end up crying of consequences of a purported hijacking of legitimate issues and a bemoaned lack of diversity, and so forth. Roper then pretends a sober mind when he beyond wild allegations tries to knuckle down to attempt a substantive claim of ‘false equivalence’ theory where he argues Survé makes himself guilty of with the cited Business Day piece in particular “the Tiso Black Star’s Business Day could by all accounts be considered irrelevant due to its small daily circulation of approximately 20,000 nationally. It is therefore easy to dismiss Business Day’s rantings and media manipulation as insignificant especially when compared to the reach of Business Report (BR) in the independent media stable, which has more than 1,5-million daily readers.”
Just when you think Roper took a few strong double espresso coffee sips that confirms an undeniable desire to sober up, he stumbles back into the drunken stupor when he extends his attack to an Adri Senekal De Wet whom he among others accuses of bad grammar pieces, a blathering mess. Typical of an intoxicated mind, its spares none and conflates things as a means to substantiate a rebuttal.
Good heavens, finally Roper ends this boozed rant when he now adopts a custodianship of a hitherto non-explained claimed “integrity” immanent in perpetual less explained or validated usages of “our media” intermittently interchanged with “our democracy”.
One is forced to read all of this tripe which could have been said in one paragraph, then again don’t forget the expert is Roper and he certainly will see me through the same lens he sees Senekal De Wet.
What is suspicious of the crusade Roper unequivocally declares himself the front-man of, is the coagulum made up of assumptions, gross deflections, veiled racist undertones and bereft of any attempt at objectivity that eternalises Roper’s opinion in published work. So, while it is easy to accuse Iqbal Survé, Roper finds it conveniently not important to engage his claimed “our media”.
It is convenient for him to invoke a claim of “our media” when he fails to appreciate what the fourth estate in SA stands for in racial, political, economic and societal expressions. He fails to critically unpack his “our media” notion and equally fails to engage the reality of a media as business reality in SA and the world over. Only a misinformed mind will want to deceive SA about the challenges of an SA family of media. A media who since the inception of democracy long ago made conscious political choices informed by ideology and economic interest on a litany of issues that militates a transformed equal society.
Roper’s rant against Survé is not anywhere given a context in which he can compare owners of Tiso Blackstar with the very Daily Maverick he uses to spit his vitriol. It would have helped all of us if an analysis of the media in ownership and role in the editorial sense of influence was made to contend Survé as out of order.
Roper could have helped us if he could have anywhere cited where newspapers owned by anyone had ever written against their owners. He must give us the precedent if he seeks to remotely argue Survé as unique.
In Roper’s fallacy of a media world, the media is owned by the public and hence not by individual interests. He confirms this sophism in the glaring recklessness of our known reality and a sojourned history. The drunk truly believe they alone are right.
Why then would Roper prove this callous and convenient, maybe a great part of that is trapped in who Chris Roper is in a historical, existential, public and political presence of South Africa. Some have labelled him an apologist for apartheid media.
Roper thus is not remotely concerned about junior reporters who may not be hired by anyone; he is attempting to use that as bulwark argument to drape him in kaftans of self-made and appointed shop-steward. This when he really again proves the racist mind of what black journalists are confronted with in the very media houses he defends. Unfortunately for Roper, we see through this extremely translucent and tearing membrane of self-serving, easily made out as what I long ago coined “the business of unionism.”
Roper’s blind side is exposed and it shows him as someone who long chose sides in a known and very polarised society, that dwells on one landmass understood as South Africa. His choices were not for justice, fairness or equal opportunity but against Survé because Roper owes an allegiance to the competitors of Survé’s media interests.
Roper’s, can I say it again, meandering drunken stupor, a crusade to be a front man for a vicious media sector where Tiso Blackstar with more than egg on its face recently had to confess to the lies it published, albeit hardly in the sincerity of conviction but in the complicity of an agenda. Where its papers until this hour have failed to explain as to what made them only retract a ring-fenced few articles for which it’s crowned journalists were relieved, when we know the very same journalist wrote many more lies and spread malicious disinformation on President Jacob Zuma, business personalities such as Kenny Kunene and Gayton McKenzie, to name a few.
Roper’s logic does not extend itself to engage this nauseating ambivalence and choice confessions of a Tiso Blackstar paper which easily could be argued came because someone threatened a denial of ad-spend if these are not retracted.
Roper in the blindness of illogic hellbent to fulfill his agenda does not interrogate the commentary from the seasoned journalist Piet Rampedi who categorically challenged the convenience of the Sunday Times in denying the reality of a rogue unit at SARS when it first published on and now declared as complete lies.
Roper could not resist comparing Survé to the Guptas because the latter is the modern-day leprous family of SA. We must not assume Roper did this blanketing and clubbing of Survé with Guptas as righteous and out of the rightful association. It may also have racist overtures of an Indian identity that is not to be trusted, the typical veiled mind and mumbled jargon of white monopoly capital and their propagators.
Political Commentator and Writer