"I'm still clinging to my Blackberry," said Obama, who's often acknowledged as perhaps the first presidential candidate to have taken full advantage of the new technology. As a result he was able to energise armies of young voters who propelled him to the White House. "They're going to (have to) pry it out of my hands."
The thinking was that having put technology to such good effect during the campaign, he'd use it to stay engaged with his supporters; almost as an ongoing campaign to help him fulfil his legislative agenda. Given his current difficulties, it doesn't seem as if he's succeeding.
The security establishment was worried that the presidential gadget would become a target for foreign spies. There's also a political dimension to this: a president has no privacy. It's a price he pays for being president. And in the partisan cauldron that is Washington DC, political foes are always fishing for incriminating evidence, be it documents or things said during unguarded moments.
George W Bush had a long, drawn-out fight with congress after it summoned two of his aides, Karl Rove and Harriet Miers, to testify in a congressional inquiry into the firing of US attorneys, which was deemed to have been political. Bush claimed that congress's insistence on information he was given in confidence by his advisers was an incursion into his presidential prerogatives. The two finally agreed to testify months after Bush had left office. And who can forget the procession of Clinton officials before a special prosecutor investigating the tawdry sexual scandal that almost destroyed his presidency?
Perhaps the door was opened a little in 1974 when the US supreme court required President Richard Nixon to turn over secret White House tapes to a federal grand jury investigating the infamous Watergate scandal which ultimately ended his presidency. Scholars regard that judgment as a precedent which went a long way towards shining a light into the dark corners of government.
South Africans often pride themselves on having one of the best democratic systems in the world. I think some humility on our part is called for. Our system can at best be described as a one-party democracy, if there's such a thing. It's no different from the system in Tanzania under Julius Nyerere. There was democracy, but only for those within the ruling CCM party.
Where the political system is not sufficiently accountable and public institutions - such as the NPA and the public protector - are easily manipulated, the probity of those in power becomes even more crucial. Which brings me back to Obama and his BlackBerry. If I were one of President Jacob Zuma's advisers, I would seriously consider taking his cellphone away. Too many people, including some hacks, are known to have a direct line to him. And for a president, Zuma attends too many funerals. Presidents rarely go to funerals. They send their deputies.
As president he obviously has to communicate with people. But it needs to be controlled, not a haphazard affair. He should not find himself in a place or position where unscrupulous people can exploit their access to him. Zuma's geniality can be a double-edged sword. While his warm and easy-going manner became an effective weapon in his battle against Thabo Mbeki, most of his problems, the corruption scandals and rape allegations, can arguably be traced to his sunny disposition. In government being nice is not always the right approach. He's easily accessible. And in politics, access is power.
Ranking the Analysts 2009
