Engage before you rage

I have been thinking a lot about media this week.

Not because I am a media academic. I am not.

But because, over the past few decades, I have worked with brands, people, businesses, causes, events, charities, sponsors, journalists, broadcasters, athletes, artists, investors and communities. And because I wear a few hats that all overlap here.

I am on the Comrades Marathon Association board, where I am responsible for supporting the marketing and membership team. That responsibility includes, among many other things, how we tell the Comrades story to runners, supporters, sponsors and the broader public.

I am very involved in the EasyEquities brand over which I obsess, where the challenge has always been to make investing accessible, human and useful. Not to shout louder than everyone else. To help more people understand money, take ownership and participate to grow and to protect their wealth.

I co-founded CN&CO, a company that has supported many brands over many years. Our best work has never been about “getting coverage” for the sake of it. It has been about helping brands grow in ways that are authentic, commercially useful and socially constructive. That work continues today for many partners.

And I am someone who believes deeply that communication matters. Words matter. Facts matter. Tone matters. Context matters. And, perhaps most importantly, participation matters.

This is not a defensive blog. It is also not an arrogant one as I am very conscious of how my own tone sometimes causes harm. And my many other failures.

But this blog is an attempt to explain how I see the media and PR landscape now, using a recent, useful example: the Comrades coverage. I know not everyone will agree with me. That is fine. In fact, I appreciate debate. But let it be constructive please. Let it be respectful. Let it be grounded in fact. We may interpret those facts differently. But let us at least start with the facts.

And before I get to those facts, let me say this.

The CMA board, the Comrades team and our excellent production partner T+W always saw this year’s production as a learning opportunity. Before any public feedback came in, we were already talking about what worked, what did not and what needed to be improved. In many ways, we were more critical than anyone else because we want the best for runners, supporters, sponsors and the broader Comrades community.

That does not mean every criticism is fair or factually accurate. It does mean that we are listening.

The old media world is gone

For too long, too many marketers and brand people still asked the wrong questions.

Did we get into the newspaper?

Did we get onto TV?

Did the “mainstream media” cover it?

Those questions are not irrelevant. But they are no longer enough. In many cases, they are not even the best questions.

The better questions are:

Did the right people see it?

Did they understand it?

Could they access it?

Could they share it?

Did it build trust?

Did it tell the truth well?

That is the changed landscape. Not changing. Changed.

Print still matters in places. Television still matters enormously. Radio still has magic. Good journalism is still essential to democracy. Editors and trained reporters still matter. In fact, I think they matter more than ever because we are drowning in opinion, noise, agenda and half-truth.

But the idea that “media” means print, TV and radio first, with everything else as some lesser add-on, is simply wrong.

People get news on WhatsApp. On TikTok. On Instagram. On Facebook. On X. On YouTube. From newsletters. From podcasts. From creators. From Reddit threads. From AI summaries. From friends. From screenshots. From people they trust more than they trust formal institutions.

That is not a moral view. It is a factual one.

The Reuters Institute’s 2026 Digital News Report, based on research across 48 markets, confirms what many of us already know from lived experience: social media and video platforms have overtaken TV and news websites as news sources globally. The same report points to falling trust, rising news avoidance and the increasing use of AI tools to access information.

That does not mean all social media is good. It does not mean all creators are reliable. It does not mean old media is bad. It means the ecosystem has changed.

And if marketers, brands, sponsors, boards, sporting bodies and media owners do not understand that, we will keep making poor decisions.

PR is not a trick

In the old days of PR, we often had to remind clients of something very simple: PR is earned.

A journalist does not owe you a story because you want one. A newspaper does not owe your CEO a profile because your CEO thinks he is interesting. A radio producer does not owe your event airtime because you are proud of it.

You need news. My dear friend Susan Ford, who died a few years ago, drummed this into me through the work we did together at Hollard and other financial services brands. Susan is one of my “old” friends, one I will always miss.

A first. A biggest. A new idea. A meaningful partnership. A real problem being solved. A human story. A trend. A change. A conflict worth understanding. A public interest issue. Something that matters beyond your own boardroom.

If you do not have that, you may still have something useful. But then it may be marketing. Or advertising. Or advertorial. Or content. Or community engagement. Or internal communication. Those are not dirty words. They are different tools.

What has changed now is that the old gatekeeping model has broken down. That brings opportunity and danger.

The opportunity is obvious. Brands and organisations can tell their own stories directly. They can build audiences. They can correct inaccuracies quickly. They can show the work, not just issue a quote. They can publish full context instead of relying on a shortened clip or a headline.

The danger is also obvious. Bad information travels fast. People see a clip and think they know the full story. A wrong post can become accepted truth before anyone has checked the facts. Rage performs well. Nuance often does not. Clickbait is rewarded. Being confrontational can generate traffic even when it does not generate understanding.

That is why I have huge respect for people doing serious work in this space. I saw Chris Roper this week after not seeing him for years. Chris was my boss decades ago when I worked briefly at Independent Online. [Edit on 25 June 2026, post blog publication – I always say there are multiple relaities. And here is one – Chris rememebrs how we met differently. And I now think we are both partly right. I met Chris via my boss at IOL, then attended some conferences he arranged, got a gig teaching English at University at Western Cape via Chris and and … Thanks for the catch Chris!] He has always had a strategic media brain.

Chris is now, deservedly, a bigshot at Code for Africa, the civic technology and data journalism organisation doing important work across the continent. He is also involved with the African Network of Centres for Investigative Reporting. If you care about media, facts, data journalism, misinformation and democracy, go and explore their work.

We need more of that. Not less.

We need journalists. We need editors. We need fact-checkers. We need independent media. We also need brands, public bodies and civil society organisations to communicate better and more openly. We cannot outsource truth entirely to journalists. We all have a responsibility.

A recent, useful example is the Comrades coverage. So let us start with the facts.

The 2026 Comrades Marathon was, by many measures, extraordinary.

The race had 20,349 starters. Of those, 18,276 finished the 85.777km Up Run within the 12-hour cut-off — an 89.81% finish rate, up on last year. The percentage of qualifiers was the highest since 2010, and the percentage of starters the highest since 2006. More women started than the year before, and a higher proportion of first-timers earned a medal. And the medical tent had a remarkably quiet day: 393 people were treated, far fewer than the 550 to 600 the team had braced for, with Chief Race Doctor Jeremy Boulter calling it “a quiet day for us in the Medical Tent.”

And the digital numbers were remarkable.

For more than 45 years, Comrades has been broadcast only on South African television. This year, for the first time in the race’s history, it was also carried live to the world — and the world showed up. On race day, the Comrades social media platforms recorded 21.6 million views, rising to 29 million across race week. Views on Facebook were up by almost 1,000% on last year, and on Instagram by 960%. The global livestream drew 742,200 viewers, 398,155 hours were consumed, and the race was watched in 122 countries. The website and app attracted 514,688 unique visitors on race day from 5,242 cities in 194 countries, tracked nearly 1.8 million participants and sent more than 7.5 million notifications. On the app alone, 47,487 people followed Gerda Steyn as she ran to her fifth Comrades title.

That is not a small media story.

That is not “just YouTube”.

That is global access to the Ultimate Human Race.

Was everything perfect? Absolutely not. But we must also be honest about what happened and who controlled what.

The broadcast rights for Comrades are not owned by the Comrades Marathon Association. They are owned by Athletics South Africa. ASA also owns the broadcast rights for other major running events, including the Sanlam Cape Town Marathon and the Two Oceans.

Various events, including Comrades, have engaged with the Competition Commission because we believe this arrangement is anti-competitive and not in the best interests of the public, runners, supporters, sponsors or the events themselves. In the Comrades case, the CMA receives no economic benefit from the sale of the broadcast rights. ASA sells those rights and keeps the money. That means the event, our runners, our sponsors and the broader Comrades community do not benefit directly from the millions generated by those rights.

And without making a judgement call here, it is relevant context that ASA is itself dealing with serious governance questions. It currently has an acting president after the suspension of its previous president, and Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Sport, Arts and Culture has raised a number of concerns about ASA governance — including allegations around financial misconduct, lottery funding and leadership failures, going as far as recommending that the board be dissolved. The SIU has also published findings involving a former ASA acting CEO and NLC funds. These matters matter because governance, rights, money and public interest cannot be separated.

That legal process is under way and we expect an outcome in the next few months.

For 2026, however, there was no debate. The broadcast rights were owned by ASA.

ASA previously had a deal with SuperSport. That ended last year. ASA did not negotiate a new deal until this year and informed Comrades only in the middle of April that it had concluded a deal with the SABC as broadcast rights holder (with no details of the deal shared).

The CMA had no role in that negotiation. We were not asked what would work. We were not asked what the Comrades community wanted. We were not asked what our sponsors needed. We were not asked what the operational realities of race day required.

That is not collaboration. That is not partnership. And, in my view, it is not good enough.

Production and broadcast rights are not the same thing

Broadcast rights are the legal rights to broadcast the event.

Production is the making of the show.

The cameras. The sound. The graphics. The commentators. The presenters. The route coverage. The technical feed. The planning. The people on the ground. The safety approvals. The cables. The trucks. The positions. The movement. The timing. The integration with race operations.

Comrades was under no obligation to fund the production or to produce the show for the SABC.

However, because ASA had not concluded a broadcast deal timeously and because we could not risk having no meaningful way to show the race to our community and sponsors, the CMA board approved, on my recommendation, the appointment of T+W at the beginning of the year to produce Comrades content for us.

T+W were my recommendation because of their highly successful Down and Chasing the Sun documentaries. Many of the team are Comrades (green-number) runners, and they are well-known for the excellent telling of stories. And for too long the Comrades stories have been neglected.

The brief was not to produce a conventional TV broadcast for a broadcaster (legally we couldn’t do this). The brief was to produce content for Comrades channels before race day, on race day and after race day. With the Comrades media and marketing team needing a capacity and skills boost, we also needed a team that has no ego and simply wants to do good work. Alongside the wonderful Comrades team, T+W went over and above what they were contracted to do. And played a vital role as we continue to build, strengthen and future-proof the Comrades structures.

Because we do not own the broadcast rights, we could not simply “broadcast” in the traditional rights-holder sense. But we could create and share content on our own platforms for our community.

When SABC Sport entered the picture and engaged with us around May, we said: tell us what you need in terms of production. If our feed works for you technically, let us explore how you can use it.

There were various discussions between SABC Sport, T+W and the CMA. These included questions around cost, quality, feed access and production requirements. About 10 days before race day, SABC Sport finally indicated that they wanted to do their own production and provided their requirements.

By then, it was very late.

People who have not been involved in staging a race like Comrades may not fully understand what that means.

Comrades is not a studio show. It is not a rugby match in a stadium. It is not a 90-minute football game with fixed camera positions and controlled access points. It is a race of around 90km each year involving more than 20,000 runners, thousands of volunteers, multiple municipalities, road closures, medical teams, security teams, traffic officials, broadcast vehicles, motorbikes, timing systems, water tables, emergency access points, finish operations, start operations and spectators across a massive route.

The safety of athletes comes first.

You cannot simply decide, 10 days before race day, to add camera positions wherever you like. You cannot place equipment where it compromises emergency access. You cannot run cables, vehicles or crews through areas already approved for other safety plans. You cannot create new congestion points. You cannot interfere with runners. You cannot put the race at risk because a production requirement arrived late.

Our Race Director and General Manager, working with T+W, responded quickly and constructively. Some requests could be accommodated. Many could not, because of timing and safety.

As a result, the CMA made a major concession. We said that if the T+W feed was technically sound, SABC could use it for free.

Remember: Comrades was paying for that production, which we were forced to commission ourselves because ASA had left negotiations so late. We were under no obligation to hand that feed to the SABC – who, owing to time pressures and a full schedule of many other events, were also not operating under ideal conditions. But in the interests of the race, the runners, the public and broader access, we made it available. For free.

SABC confirmed the feed was technically sound.

They chose not to use our YouTube production graphics. They chose not to collaborate on presenters. Totally their choice. On race day, the SABC broadcast used our feed but had its own commentators, its own scheduling and its own channel decisions. This included slotting in a cooking programme during the race broadcast. The CMA had no control over that. The SABC broadcast also carried adverts from competitors to some of our sponsors. Again, the CMA had no control over that. I think the SABC broadcast got a lot of stuff right – including some superb commentating. The strong expertise and passion for Comrades at our national broadcaster certainly shone through.

When we say “the Comrades broadcast” was this or that, we need to be precise.

There were two different viewing experiences.

There was the SABC broadcast, using the CMA / T+W feed but controlled by SABC in terms of commentators, scheduling, presentation and advertising.

And there was the CMA production across our own digital channels, including YouTube, supported by a much broader social media ecosystem.

The two should not be collapsed into one thing.

What we got right

I am proud of what the CMA team, T+W and our broader partners achieved.

For the first time in the history of Comrades, the race was available as a global livestream. People in 122 countries watched. Families could follow loved ones from anywhere in the world. Supporters did not have to rely only on a linear TV window. Clips travelled across platforms. Social media numbers exploded. The website and app carried huge traffic. The runner tracking function was used at scale.

We also had 20 static cameras at key points, including the finish and other important places along the route. This meant viewers could choose part of their own viewing experience. If you wanted to stay on the main production, you could. If you wanted to keep an eye on a fixed point because your runner was coming through, you could do that too. At those points, you did not need to worry that the main production would cut away just as your runner arrived. You could watch that camera and not miss them.

That is powerful. We promoted this very poorly. That is one of the learnings. But the concept is right. In future, it can become even more valuable.

The digital layer gives us something TV alone never could.

A traditional broadcast has to choose what to show. It cuts from elite race to human story to sponsor feature to finish line to advert break to studio discussion. That will always mean something is missed.

Digital allows multiple layers. The elite race. The human stories. The finish camera. The static route cameras. The clips. The behind-the-scenes moments. The sponsor stories. The athlete tracking. The post-race interviews. The archive. The ability to watch later (our production is still available – and trust me, we are watching it constantly to learn and to improve!) and the ability to share. With all the useful feedback and data, I think there is a much richer understanding of which stories must be covered – and in which manner.

That is the future.

Not TV or digital.

TV and digital.

Broadcast and social.

Live and on-demand.

Professional commentary and community storytelling.

Main feed and personalised access.

South Africa and the world.

What we got wrong

We must also be honest about what we got wrong with our CMA production.

The sound at times was very poor. Some of the transitions could have been way better.

With our production partner, we are doing a full breakdown on all areas of improvement, and feedback from our community has been invaluable. Thank you.

We did not explain the difference between the SABC broadcast and the CMA production well enough before race day. We probably underestimated how many people would assume that anything they saw on SABC was controlled by Comrades.

We need clearer communication with runners, sponsors, media, supporters and the public about who owns what, who controls what and where people can access what.

We need better packaging of the digital offering.

We need to keep improving the production values.

We need to listen carefully to criticism, even when it is badly phrased or factually incomplete.

We also need to defend our people when criticism becomes unfair, uninformed or personal.

Both things can be true.

We can learn and we can push back.

We can accept criticism and correct inaccuracies.

We can be humble without pretending that others did their jobs well when they did not.

Old-school arrogance is not acceptable

Let me say this plainly.

The way ASA handled the broadcast rights process was not good enough.

The lack of collaboration with the event was not good enough.

The lateness was not good enough.

The fact that ASA benefits economically from the broadcast rights while Comrades and its sponsors receive no direct economic benefit is, in my view, wrong.

And some of the old-school thinking around broadcast remains a problem.

It is not acceptable to treat the event, its runners, its sponsors and its community as afterthoughts.

It is not acceptable to think that a rights deal concluded late, without proper collaboration with the event, will magically result in the best possible public product.

It is not acceptable to ignore the people who actually build, fund, stage and protect the race.

But this is not about attacking for the sake of attacking.

The answer is not for everyone to retreat into their corners.

The answer is collaboration.

If the Competition Commission finds that ASA should not control the broadcast rights in the way it currently does, then we want to engage with SABC and other broadcasters, digital platforms, sponsors and many others about the best way to make Comrades available to as many people as possible in as many high-quality ways as possible. There is deep passion and commitment from a variety of stakeholders to improve all aspects of the Comrades.

If the current rights position remains, then ASA, SABC and the CMA still need to work together far better.

Because the race is bigger than any institution.

The Comrades story belongs to runners, supporters, volunteers, families, communities, sponsors and South Africa.

As I wrote recently, Comrades is in all of us.

That is not a slogan. It is the truth of the event.

The media lesson for brands

What does this have to do with PR and brands more broadly?

Everything.

The Comrades broadcast debate is a case study in the changed media landscape.

Some people watched on TV.

Some watched on YouTube.

Some followed on the app.

Some consumed clips on TikTok, Facebook and Instagram.

Some followed WhatsApp groups.

Some only saw a headline or an angry post from someone who did not know the full context.

Some watched the full livestream later.

Some only cared whether their runner finished. Some wanted elite race coverage. Some wanted human stories. Some wanted a traditional broadcast. Some wanted global access.

All of them are real audiences.

A brand or event that thinks only one of those audiences matters is making a strategic mistake.

At CN&CO, we see this all the time. The old PR question was often, “Can we get this into the media?” The better question now is, “What is the right story, for the right audience, in the right format, on the right platform, at the right time?”

Sometimes that is a Business Day article. Sometimes a radio interview. Sometimes a long-form blog. Sometimes a 30-second clip. Sometimes a WhatsApp note to members. Sometimes a LinkedIn post. Sometimes paid media. Sometimes a community event or a sponsor activation. Sometimes a podcast. Sometimes a direct email from the CEO.

And sometimes it is all of the above, properly sequenced and measured.

With one of our current clients, rain, we have been thinking hard about this. The old instinct would be to chase strong PR in the traditional sense: get the biggest possible headlines, push the founder story, compare infrastructure, fight for attention.

But the smarter approach now is far more nuanced and assisted by AI. AI can help us see patterns, test messages, summarise sentiment, identify gaps, understand confusion and create better starting points. (By the way, our work on rain has shown that over 50% of what people now use their data for is AI-related!) But AI cannot replace judgement. It cannot replace ethics. It cannot replace relationships. It cannot replace the human instinct that says: this is true, this is useful, this is fair, this is worth saying and this should perhaps not be said yet.

The best PR has always been human.

The tools have changed. The principle has not.

The media is under pressure too

It is easy to criticise journalists and media houses. Sometimes they deserve it. Sometimes they are lazy. Sometimes they chase clicks. Sometimes they want confrontation more than understanding. Sometimes they decide the story before gathering all the facts.

But let us also be fair.

The media business model is under enormous pressure.

Print has collapsed in many places. Digital advertising money has moved to global platforms. Newsrooms have fewer journalists covering more stories under more pressure. Broadcasters face streaming competition, social media competition and cost pressure. Public broadcasters have funding and political challenges. Commercial broadcasters have subscription, rights and advertising challenges.

In South Africa, we have seen historic print titles closed or threatened. We have seen newsrooms cut costs. We have seen the Competition Commission examine how digital platforms affect referral traffic, revenue generation, visibility and long-term media viability. We have seen global platforms agree to support packages for South African media because the imbalance is now too obvious to ignore.

So yes, media must do better.

But brands must also do better. Events must do better. Boards must do better. Public bodies must do better.

We cannot simply say “the media got it wrong” if we have not made the facts accessible, clear and timely.

We cannot complain about misinformation if we are not prepared to communicate.

We cannot complain about lack of context if we refuse to provide context.

We cannot complain about public anger if we only speak when things go wrong.

That is another lesson from Comrades.

We need ongoing communication.

Show up, not only when angry

This weekend — Saturday 20 and Sunday 21 June — South Africans can register to vote for the 2026 Local Government Elections, which take place on 4 November. Voting stations are open from 08:00 to 17:00, and you can also register or check your details online. The IEC has built its whole campaign around three words: get up, show up, vote.

That matters.

This connects to something Michelle Obama said last week, at the opening of the Obama Presidential Center in Chicago. “Hope is the essential spark that lights the fire of change,” she told the crowd.

But she was just as clear that hope is not something that simply happens to us. It is a choice. So is speaking up. “Voting is a choice,” she said. So is showing up for the place you live.

Voting is not the only form of citizenship. But it is a vital one.

Local government affects water, roads, sewage, refuse removal, safety, parks, planning, permits, local economic development and the basic dignity of daily life. If we care about our communities, we must care about local government.

And if we care, we must show up.

This is where I want to connect media, Comrades, volunteering, civic society and democracy.

Serving on the Comrades board is voluntary. We are not paid. Many people serving on non-profit boards, school boards, charity boards, community safety forums, sports committees, arts organisations and civic bodies are not paid. They do it because they care. They do it because someone must. They do it because institutions do not magically run themselves.

That does not mean we are above criticism.

Far from it.

If you serve, you must be accountable. You must listen. You must communicate. You must accept that people will disagree with you. You must not become precious. Even when it, sometimes, is bloody hard not to. And apologies for when I do!

However, people who criticise should also understand the difference between engagement and drive-by outrage.

If you care about Comrades, become a member. Attend meetings. Ask questions. Serve on a committee. Volunteer. Offer expertise. Help us improve. Do not only arrive in the comments section once a year.

If you care about your suburb, join the local forum. Help with safety. Help with clean-ups. Attend municipal meetings. Know your ward councillor. Report problems properly. Follow up.

If you care about schools, arts, sport, homelessness, animal welfare, investment education, public health, youth development or the environment, find a place to serve.

Do not leave it all to others.

Yes, we get irritated. Yes, we get angry. Yes, we get cynical. South Africa can test even the most optimistic among us.

But cynicism is not a strategy.

Disengagement is not leadership.

And shouting from the sidelines is not the same as building.

We need better disagreement

The media landscape has made it easier to speak. It has not always made us better at listening.

That is a problem.

We need robust debate. I enjoy robust debate. Anyone who knows me knows that.

But robust debate is not abuse. It is not making things up. It is not ignoring facts that do not suit your argument. It is not attacking volunteers as if they are villains because something went wrong. It is not assuming bad faith because you are frustrated.

We can do better.

The Comrades broadcast can be better. The CMA can communicate better. ASA can collaborate better. Sponsors can be integrated better. Digital can be packaged better. Traditional broadcast can be respected without being treated as the only thing that matters. Social media can be used powerfully without pretending it is always wise.

That is the work.

Messy, necessary, human work.

A final thought

The world is not as broken as our feeds sometimes make it feel.

On Comrades race day I saw people run, suffer, laugh, cry, collapse, recover, help each other and finish. I saw volunteers serve for hours. I saw families wait for loved ones. I saw elite athletes do extraordinary things. I saw ordinary people do extraordinary things. I saw South Africa at its complicated, emotional, generous best. I shook hands, hugged, comforted and congratulated many, many of those who crossed the finish line. A real privilege. One of the biggest in my life.

And then I saw, in the days after, how quickly the story of something so big can be narrowed into one complaint, one clip, one misunderstanding, one headline, one angry thread.

That is the media world we live in.

So we have to tell fuller stories.

We have to provide better facts.

We have to build our own channels.

We have to support good journalism.

We have to call out poor journalism.

We have to use AI wisely.

We have to respect audiences wherever they are.

We have to stop pretending the old media world is coming back.

We have to vote.

We have to volunteer.

We have to serve.

We have to engage before we rage.

And we have to keep believing that institutions, communities, races, brands and countries can be made better by people who show up.

Comrades is in all of us.

So is South Africa.

Let us act like it.