News24 and AfriForum: The scandal that never was

With the rise of podcasting, YouTube and alternative media in general, many are celebrating the downfall of the legacy media. The legacy media has suffered significant reputational damage, and much of it is their own doing.

However, in our celebration, we should be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater. One of the most important features of the media as we used to know it, is investigative journalism.

Investigative journalism serves an essential function in any free society. Organisations that ask members of the public to entrust them with their money should expect scrutiny, and the public has every right to know whether those organisations manage their finances responsibly. If there is evidence of corruption, financial misconduct, self-enrichment or the misuse of donor funds, journalists not only have the right to expose it – they have a duty to do so. This applies even more to governments, because, unlike with NGO membership, we don’t have the option to simply opt out of paying taxes.

Over the weekend, News24 published some revelations regarding the finances of AfriForum, probably the largest NGO in South Africa. ‘Inside AfriForum’s money machine: How lobby group splurges on salaries, marketing’ – with a heading like that the reader is sure to expect a scandal of some sort.

I should disclose at this point that I worked for AfriForum from 2010 until 2023.

As a former employee, having read News24's investigation carefully, however, I was struck by a strange contradiction. The headlines and overall framing suggest that readers are about to encounter a major financial exposé. Yet when one works through the evidence presented, the promised scandal never materialises. There are no allegations of fraud, theft, unlawful expenditure, accounting irregularities or the misuse of donor money. Instead, News24 attempts to cast perfectly ordinary features of a large advocacy organisation—such as salaries, marketing, recruitment and travel—as inherently suspicious.

As a matter of principle, public institutions should be transparent with their finances. On that basis, we should not object to News24 asking questions about AfriForum’s finances. That’s not the issue. The issue, however, is that having failed to uncover any evidence of financial misconduct, the investigation seeks to manufacture a sense of scandal by presenting routine organisational practices as though they were revelations of wrongdoing.

The scandal that never arrived

The tone of the investigation and the commentary by News24 journalists, the editorial team and ideological supporters (including Max du Preez), suggests that readers are about to learn of serious financial misconduct. Yet, after reading the investigation in full, one is left searching for the scandal.

News24 does not allege fraud. It does not allege theft. It does not allege corruption. It does not allege unlawful expenditure. It does not allege accounting irregularities or qualified audits. It does suggest that donor funds were diverted for private enrichment, but presents no evidence to that effect.

The central revelation is that AfriForum spends a substantial amount on salaries, marketing and recruitment. That is hardly surprising. Those are precisely the expenditure categories one would expect to find in a large advocacy organisation employing hundreds of people, conducting litigation, running campaigns, mobilising communities and maintaining a national presence. Presenting this as some form of scandal would be to suggest that someone who plays Age of Empires is cheating if they spend a significant amount of their resources on villagers and mining, when we know that there is no other way to win (in the game), or succeed (with an NGO) if one does not do exactly that.

An investigation that uncovers no financial misconduct is perfectly entitled to conclude that an organisation is simply well managed. In fact, that is exactly what is revealed by the financial statements. News24 might just as well published its findings under the heading: ‘Inside AfriForum’s finances: How to run an NGO responsibly’.

Instead, News24 appears hellbent to convince readers that ordinary expenditure becomes suspicious merely because the organisation in question is AfriForum.

The elephant in the room is not AfriForum or its finances. It’s the relentless ideological quest of the editorial team at News24.

A misleading distinction between projects and salaries

The core of News24's criticism is its claim that only a relatively small percentage of AfriForum's expenditure is spent on ‘actual projects’, while much larger amounts are spent on salaries and marketing. This distinction is deeply misleading because it assumes that an NGO is able to execute projects without people.

AfriForum is not a construction company purchasing bricks and machinery. It is an advocacy organisation. Its work consists of litigation, research, community organisation, policy development, neighbourhood watches, campaigns, media engagement and public education. Every one of those activities depends primarily on skilled people. And skilled people depend on salaries.

Treating employee costs as though they are somehow disconnected from project delivery fundamentally misunderstands how knowledge-based organisations operate. Indeed, in many non-profit organisations staff costs are allocated directly to programme expenditure because staff execute the programmes.

This claim by News24 can only indicate a remarkably shallow understanding of how an NGO functions, or obvious malicious intent… or both.

Professional salaries are not a scandal

News24 also devotes considerable attention to the remuneration of senior employees, clearly inviting readers to conclude that these salaries are excessive. Yet, it became clear very quickly that their reporting on senior employee remuneration is flawed, as is evident in their claims regarding Werner Human’s salary, despite the fact that Werner Human is employed by the Solidarity Movement, not AfriForum, and has (according to both Kallie Kriel from AfriForum and Dirk Hermann from Solidarity) never received a cent from AfriForum. It turns out that News24 was wrong, not only in claiming that Human is paid by AfriForum, but also that the salary attributed to him in their reporting is much higher than his actual salary, which is paid by the Solidarity Movement Trust.

In other words, News24 leaves us with nothing more than misleading conclusions and unsubstantiated suggestions – accusations without substance.

With that said, it’s perfectly reasonable for senior AfriForum employees to receive large salaries, given that the organisation runs an annual turnover of more than two hundred million rand and employs hundreds of people.

AfriForum employs executives, experienced advocates, researchers, financial professionals, campaign managers and specialists in a wide range of fields. Many of these employees could earn considerably more in the private sector. They remain because they believe in the organisation's mission, not because it offers unusually generous remuneration. I too worked at AfriForum knowing very well that if I were in it for the money, I should’ve become an advocate or go into business. I turned down the prospect of earning more because I wanted to work for an organisation where I could experience personal fulfilment.

Still, like any professionally managed organisation, AfriForum seeks to pay market-related salaries and does this on the Patterson grading system. This constitutes perfectly reasonable corporate governance. Organisations that consistently underpay talented employees eventually lose them. Donors rightly expect their contributions to be managed responsibly, but they should also expect the organisation to retain competent people capable of delivering results. As an AfriForum donor, I expect that my contribution would go to ensure that people are paid sufficiently and not exploited. Knowing that people are paid well gives me as a member the assurance that the organisation is run responsibly. Yet, News24 is trying to present evidence of a fundamental corporate governance principle as evidence of a scandal.

I don’t have any desire to know what Kriel’s CEO salary is. Because I know that such decisions are made through the board of directors, with external consultants and through proper corporate governance processes. I do know, however, that if he had been the CEO of a for-profit, private company of the same size, his salary would be substantially higher.

What the investigation actually confirms

Ironically, some of the strongest evidence in News24's own investigation points in the opposite direction from its headline.

The financial statements reveal an organisation that is audited annually and receives clean audits. News24 presents no evidence of fraud, unlawful expenditure, accounting irregularities or misuse of donor funds. Yet, it wants to turn the reader against AfriForum by casting doubt without providing any evidence.

Readers are manipulated to infer misconduct from expenditure categories that are entirely lawful and entirely ordinary.

The distinction is important, particularly if one were to bear in mind that News24 is the largest news outlet in South Africa. There is a significant difference between demonstrating wrongdoing and encouraging suspicion.

Reporting or political framing?

Another striking feature of the investigation is the extent to which financial reporting is interwoven with political characterisation.

Readers are repeatedly reminded that AfriForum is an ‘Afrikaner nationalist’ organisation. References are made to ‘apartheid-era nostalgia’, accusations of ‘state collapse’ and ‘so-called cultural autonomy’. Whether one agrees with these descriptions is beside the point. They are not financial findings. They do not explain the annual financial statements. Nor do they help readers understand how donor money is spent.

Their function is entirely rhetorical rather than evidential. It serves to shape a narrative and lead the misinformed reader to false conclusions in the absence of evidence.

Good investigative journalism should allow facts to speak for themselves. When political descriptions repeatedly accompany otherwise ordinary financial information, readers are entitled to ask whether the reporting is primarily investigating finances or reinforcing an existing narrative about the organisation being investigated.

The measure of an advocacy organisation

Ultimately, News24 evaluates AfriForum almost entirely through accounting categories.

An advocacy organisation exists to achieve outcomes. It seeks to influence policy, litigate important cases, organise communities, protect rights, conduct research and persuade the public. Those activities require people, expertise and communication. And these things require funding.

The more meaningful question is therefore not what percentage of expenditure appears under a particular accounting heading, but whether the organisation delivers value to those who support it.

The questions that News24 does not ask include the following:

• Has it won important legal victories?
• Has it established functioning community structures?
• Has it influenced public debate?
• Has it served the interests of its members?

These questions are much more important to donors than the percentage that is spent on marketing.

Financial statements are important, but they cannot by themselves tell us whether an advocacy organisation is successful. Judged by the evidence presented in News24's own investigation, AfriForum appears to be a professionally managed organisation with clean audits, market-related remuneration and ordinary operational expenditure. If that is the strongest case that can be made after an extensive investigation into its finances, then the real story is not that AfriForum has a financial scandal. It is that News24 has attempted to create one where none exists.

To be fair, some of the people who work at News24 have proven themselves to be good investigative journalists if they want to be. Yet, it appears that News24 has either forgotten what investigative journalism is, or it values ideological advocacy above truth.

Ernst Roets

Dr Roets is Executive Director of Lex Libertas