Media Representation of the Stilfontein Mining Incident: A Critical Analysis

This essay examines how four South African news outlets framed the 2024/2025 Stilfontein mining catastrophe, focusing on representation, discourse, and media ethics. Using Stuart Hall’s theory of representation and Foucault’s concept of discourse, the analysis evaluates how language, imagery, and framing shaped public perception of artisanal miners.

Introduction:

While the end of apartheid brought an end to institutionalised racial oppression, many of its socio-economic legacies persist. In the years following South Africa’s transition into democracy, tensions between South Africans and foreign nationals have emerged. Xenophobia in post-apartheid South Africa has been linked to a range of structural and social factors, including limited economic opportunities and political instability.

According to the World Population Review (2025), South Africa has the second-highest unemployment rate in the world. Cycles of poverty have been maintained and exacerbated throughout the timeline of contemporary South Africa. Furthermore, the country’s high rates of crime, to some extent, reflect the desperation of the economically disadvantaged to survive. 

Among others, illegal mining is a risky crime in contemporary South Africa. Artisanal miners (often including undocumented migrants) commonly inspect abandoned mines in hopes of extracting valuable minerals. To add complexity, powerful and often hidden kingpins profit enormously from crimes like human trafficking and slavery, linking the illegal mining industry to neocolonial exploitation. In December 2023, the South African government launched ‘Operation Vala Mgodi’ to prevent and combat illegal mining nationwide. In August 2024, reports emerged of unlawful mining at Buffelsfontein Gold Mine in Stilfontein. Some miners were said to have run out of food, and those who resurfaced reportedly faced arrest by the South African Police Service (SAPS) (Sowetan Live, 2025). The events that followed resulted in the deaths of almost a hundred artisanal miners and led to what has come to be known as the Stilfontein Mining catastrophe. Some critics, including Duma Gqubule, an economist and research associate at the Social Policy Initiative, compare the incident to the Marikana Massacre (SABC news, 2025). 

Since objectivity is ultimately unattainable from a subjective standpoint, responsible journalism should strive for neutrality and provide context when re-presenting facts. This essay investigates the following research question: How did South African news outlets represent artisanal miners during the Stilfontein mining catastrophe, and what implications do these constructions have for public discourse and journalistic ethics?

Literature review:

Under apartheid, restricted freedom of expression meant that the media were heavily censored (Lyster 2018: 1). In the post-apartheid democratic context, journalism plays a watchdog role by “facilitating political communication” (Wasserman 2010: 240). This role is closely linked to the political freedoms enshrined in the South African Constitution, which formally guarantees press freedom, with legal and ethical limits. In this democratic landscape, independent journalism refers to reporting that is free from the influence of political and economic power. As Wasserman (2010: 241) notes, this freedom brought with it a responsibility to uphold ethical standards, leading to the establishment of self-regulatory mechanisms such as the Press Council and the Press Code of Ethics. These structures are aimed at promoting accountability within the media and ensuring that reporting is guided by professional norms.

Journalism mediates the relationship between the public and power structures, making decisions about what is newsworthy and how events are framed. Journalists are therefore expected to approach their work as neutrally and critically distanced as possible. As Wasserman (2010: 247) states, “the ideal role, from journalists’ point of view, seems to be that of detachment and balance.” Adherence to legal frameworks and ethical guidelines is essential in maintaining the credibility of independent journalism and ensuring that information can be disseminated clearly, fairly, and without manipulation.

In media studies, representation refers to the construction and communication of meaning through language. Academic writer and cultural studies pioneer, Stuart Hall (1997: 17), describes it as the “link between concepts and language which enables us to refer to [things in] the 'real' world of objects.” According to Hall (1997: 17), this process operates through two interconnected systems: mental representations (concepts carried in our minds) and the system of language, which allows us to express and share those concepts socially. In this context, language is not limited to spoken or written words but encompasses any system of signs capable of conveying meaning, including images, gestures, and sounds.

Hall (1997: 15) outlines three approaches to representation: reflective, intentional, and constructionist. This study draws on the constructionist approach, which sees meaning as socially constructed rather than mirrored or imposed. As Hall (1997: 25) states, “things don’t mean: we construct meaning, using representational systems — concepts and signs.” This aligns with Fernand de Saussure’s theory of semiotics, which emphasises the culturally constructed relationship between signs and their meanings (cited in Hall 1997: 31). Representation theory is therefore essential to media analysis, particularly in journalism, where language choices, imagery, and framing practices are critical in shaping public understanding of people, events, and issues.

Discourse can be understood as acceptable statements that define the way a particular topic is discussed and understood in society. Philosopher Michel Foucault (cited in Hall 1997: 44) argued that discourse does not merely reflect reality,  but also produces knowledge and power, influencing what is seen as ‘truth’ in a given historical context. While physical things exist, they only acquire meaning through discourse (Hall 1997:44). In this view, discourse refers not just to language, but to the systems of meaning that determine what can be said, who can speak, and how knowledge is constructed. Foucault (cited in Hall 1997: 44) argued that the dominant institutions and power structures of a particular era shape discursive formations. He rejected the idea that the media transmits objective truths, arguing instead that the media play an active role in constructing social realities. In this context, the media’s communicative function is a form of representation, where framing, language, and imagery contribute to shaping public understanding. For journalism, this means that beyond legal and ethical compliance, media practitioners must remain aware of how their reporting engages with dominant discourses. The inclusion or exclusion of specific perspectives, as well as the terminology used to describe individuals or events, reflect broader discursive norms and power relations.

Xenophobia in the South African context refers to the fear or hatred of foreign nationals and is often fuelled by myths and stereotypes (Steenkamp, 2009). It is typically expressed by Black South Africans towards other Black Africans and has intensified in post-apartheid South Africa. While African migrants were once seen as comrades during the apartheid struggle, they are now frequently scapegoated for crime and unemployment (Steenkamp 2009: 439). This shift is shaped by a complex interplay of factors such as economic insecurity, the continuation of cycles of oppression, and public discourse. Surveys by the Southern African Migration Project (SAMP) have consistently ranked South Africa among the most xenophobic countries in the world (cited in Steenkamp 2009: 441). Government and media discourse reinforce these views, often portraying migrants as threats using derogatory language such as "illegal aliens" or "hordes" (Steenkamp 2009: 441). Xenophobic violence erupted in May 2008, claiming the lives of sixty-two people. Although framed as spontaneous, the violence reflected long-standing societal resentment and the state's failure to act on warning signs (Steenkamp 2009: 441). Similar incidents, including the Stilfontein incident, continue to occur in contemporary South Africa. Public discourse, especially when driven by media and authority figures, has the power to either perpetuate or challenge xenophobic narratives.

Methodology:

Four different South African digital news reports were selected for this study, covering the Stilfontein mining catastrophe from 15 November 2024 to 17 January 2025. These included written reports by the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) and Independent Online (IOL), as well as two visual reports by Newzroom Afrika. This selection ensured variation in platform, mediums (text and video), outlet ownership and duration to trace shifts or patterns in coverage. The SABC and IOL articles were accessed via Google, and the Newzroom Afrika video segments via YouTube. The headline of the SABC (2024) article reads, “SAPS denies claims of trapped illegal miners in Stilfontein” and focuses on SAPS’ operations at the mine. The headlines of the Newzroom Afrika reports read “Sillfontein illegal miners request for mayonnaise” (2024) and “Stilfontein: six more illegal miners resurface” (2025). These reports document unfolding operations at the mine, including interviews with community members, rescue volunteers, resurfaced miners and a letter with a message from miners who remain underground. The IOL (2025) article’s headline reads, “Cannibalism shock: Stilfontein illegal miner claims they resorted to eating human flesh in the face of starvation”. The report is based on the claim that extreme hunger faced by miners underground led to cannibalism. IOL was expelled from the Press Council of South Africa a few months before this publication after failure to adhere to Press Code ethics, raising questions about the credibility of their report. 

A thematic analysis was conducted by first coding recurring patterns across the texts. The codes included: terminology used for miners, sources quoted, visual framing, and news angle. Elements such as the photographs in both written reports were also noted. These were refined into four key themes: othering/dehumanisation, the colonial/ gaze, the lack of context and complexity and sensationalism. 

Ethical sensitivity was employed to avoid the perpetuation of potentially harmful narratives as well as to recognise and uphold the dignity of the subjects involved in this study. Language like ‘illegal miners’  or ‘zama zamas’ often occurs in the sample texts. Although colloquial and socially acceptable, it can be argued that such terms deny people their humanity. Where appropriate, alternative terminology such as ‘undocumented’ or ‘artisanal miners’ is used to maintain neutrality and dignity of subjects.

Findings:

A consistent theme across all four sample texts is the othering of the miners, which contributes to their dehumanisation. Each headline includes the term “illegal miner(s)”, a label repeated throughout the written and verbal content of the reports. Section 35(3)(h) of the South African Constitution’s Bill of Rights guarantees that every accused person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. While it may be widely assumed that the miners were engaging in unlawful activity, labelling them as “illegal” in media coverage presumes guilt before any legal process has taken place. This framing undermines their constitutional right and disregards journalistic norms such as using terms like “allegedly” when facts have not been confirmed. 

Furthermore, this contradicts clause 1.1 of chapter 1 in the Press Council’s Code, which states that journalists must “take care to report news truthfully, accurately and fairly”. Using “illegal” to describe people rather than their actions is reductive and lacks fairness or nuance. This language positions the miners not as complex individuals but as criminals by default. While commonly used in public discourse, the use of the colloquial term “zama zama” in the IOL (2025) article may be considered derogatory. Loosely translated from isiZulu, it describes someone who “tries their luck”. This framing trivialises the desperate socio-economic conditions that lead individuals to engage in artisanal mining and may further perpetuate stigma.

The second recurring theme across sample texts is the reproduction of the colonial gaze of Africa. This can be observed through visual and descriptive elements embedded in the texts. Black bodies are portrayed as famished, desperate, and stripped of dignity. The SABC (2024) article, for instance, not only spotlights law enforcement figures but contains a single image of a row of uniformed police officers with their vehicles, stationed in a vast, barren landscape echoing stereotypical depictions of Africa as desolate. The image also evokes a sense of state control and surveillance rather than humanitarian concern. Furthermore, a reporter describes the resurfacing of two “illegal miners” as a “positive move for law enforcement” (Newzroom Afrika 2025). This statement, combined with the accompanying footage of one of the miners lying motionless on the ground, visibly emaciated, covered in flies, and receiving no medical attention, reveals which narratives have been prioritised. The framing positions law enforcement as heroes and the miners as criminals, reinforcing a dichotomy that aligns with colonial tropes of African subjects as unruly or in need of control.

In the same Newzroom Afrika (2025) report, the journalist greets a resurfaced miner with casual slang, saying, “Sho mfowethu… shap my brother” before beginning the interview. The informal tone could be interpreted as an attempt to ease into questioning or elicit cooperation. Still, it raises ethical concerns about the miner’s state of mind and ability to give informed consent at that moment. The use of a casual tone and local vernacular risks minimising the trauma and gravity of the miner’s recent experience, having just emerged from extremely harsh conditions involving death, hunger, and illness. This approach to reporting on African suffering mimics historical patterns and perpetuates the colonial gaze of Africa.  

Another recurring theme in the coverage of these stories is the lack of context and complexity in the reporting. The only direct account from a miner appears in the brief interview discussed above, which, as previously noted, is shallow and ethically questionable given the miner’s recent trauma. IOL (2025) uses an unidentified miner as a source to corroborate claims of cannibalism underground. Although included, his voice is used to sensationalise rather than to inform. In another report, the miners’ perspective is reduced to a photograph of a handwritten list requesting necessities such as soap, condiments, and nonperishable food items (Newzroom Afrika 2024). Written in Sesotho, the letter opens with a respectful greeting and uses the phrase “re kopa,” meaning “may we please have.” Despite this, the caption labels the items as “non-essential goods,” and the reporter frames them as “demands.” One community member even dismisses the list as asking for “luxury” items (Newzroom Afrika, 2024). This framing distorts the reality of the situation. Essential goods are being labelled as luxuries without interrogation or challenge by the reporter. 

Moreover, the voices of scholars or specialists in criminology, economics, labour, or migration who could provide structural context are absent. There is no discussion of systemic poverty, the informal economy, or the long-standing efforts by artisanal miners to have their work recognised and regulated (Gqubule 2025). As a result, the coverage lacks the analytical depth needed to situate informal mining within broader socio-economic and political frameworks. There is little consideration of the underlying conditions that lead individuals to engage in informal mining. 

The final theme identified in the texts is sensationalism, which can be seen in exaggerated headlines, emotionally manipulative framing, and a disregard for the dignity of the individuals at the centre of the story. A striking example appears in the IOL (2025) article that focuses on claims of cannibalism among trapped miners. The report has shock value and fails to interrogate the ethical implications of publishing such allegations with minimal evidence. The emphasis on these claims does little to inform the public in a meaningful way and instead dehumanises the miners by portraying them through a lens of extremity and horror. This, once again, mimics representations of Africa through the colonial gaze as a place of savagery and desperation. 

Similarly, the Newzroom Afrika (2024) headline, “illegal miners request for mayonnaise,” frames a life-threatening situation in a way that invites mockery. The coverage trivialises the gravity of the miners’ circumstances by portraying desperate pleas for basic supplies as absurd. This lack of compassion and seriousness is further reflected in the careless misspelling of “Stilfontein” in the same headline. Both articles use clickbait techniques, foregrounding peculiar details to attract viewership rather than providing insightful and responsible journalism. These practices may violate journalistic commitments to fairness, dignity, and the public interest. In the process, the lived experiences of artisanal miners are turned into spectacle, reducing human suffering to entertainment.

Examining the language, imagery, and framing used in these reports shows that meaning is not neutral but constructed. The media’s representations, whether through dehumanising labels, lack of context, or sensationalised narratives, shape public understanding and reinforce dominant power structures. These framings, often subtle, reflect broader societal attitudes towards African migrants and contribute to the normalisation of their marginalisation.

Conclusion:

This study examined how artisanal miners were represented across four South African news reports covering the Stilfontein mining catastrophe. These patterns identified through thematic analysis revealed that mainstream media coverage of the incident often reinforced harmful stereotypes and failed to humanise or contextualise the lived realities of artisanal miners, a group already marginalised in public discourse.

Some reporting appeared to contravene basic ethical principles in the South African Constitution and the Press Code of Ethics, highlighting concerns about fairness, accuracy, and dignity in media representation. While public outrage over the miners’ treatment by the government has grown, little attention has been paid to the role of the media in shaping public perception. The absence of widespread critique around these representations may suggest a level of public complacency. While journalists should be liable for their failures or shortcomings, citizens and media consumers should also remain aware of their duty to question the narratives they are fed and to critically engage with the information they absorb. In a world increasingly marked by polarisation, as noted by the World Economic Forum (2024), recognising our shared humanity should remain a foremost priority. Journalism should strive to do better, and so should we all.

See also: Bildungsroman and nation-building in Duiker's Thirteen Cents