ABSTRACT
Truth commissions are state-appointed investigative bodies mandated to research and report on large-scale human rights abuses perpetrated during a specifi c time period or political regime. Designed as an alternative to trials,
broadcastingsouthafrica’strc
truth commissions are supposed to uncover “the truth about certain historical events rather than prosecuting specifi c defendants.”3 An alternative form of justice, they are part and parcel of an emerging fi eld called transitional justice. There had been sixteen truth commissions in the world before South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) began its work in 1996.4 But South Africa broke with precedent in two signifi cant ways. First, it offered conditional amnesty to perpetrators who came forward to give statements, and if these statements met certain criteria, perpetrators could be deemed free from civil and criminal prosecution for their past violations of human rights forever.5 Second, the TRC made the remarkable decision to hold its hearings publicly, with proceedings open to any spectator who wished to attend. Truth commissions before South Africa’s made their work known to the public primarily through the publication of a fi nal report. And South Africa’s TRC, too, created a summary report, with the fi rst fi ve volumes appearing in 1998 and then two more in 2003.6 However, this report should be, I argue, of secondary importance to our examination, analysis, and evaluation of the TRC. Rather, media coverage, though little studied thus far, was far more central to the national impact of the commission during its lifetime than any other representation, including the commission’s own summary report, print journalism’s coverage of the TRC, and the barrage of academic books that have followed in the TRC’s wake.
