The DA is refusing to blink amid a political storm over its TV campaign ad depicting the national flag burning, saying it has no regrets.
Helen Zille, who is responsible for the day-to-day running of the DA as its federal council chair, said on Friday the blue party was not losing sleep over the row.
The ad has been roundly condemned by analysts, members of the public and the DA’s opponents such as the ANC, who have rejected it as “divisive, treasonous and despicable”.
The SABC on Thursday resolved to stop airing the ad, while arts and culture minister Zizi Kodwa is planning to take the DA to court.
Some critics have suggested the ad has echoes of the “fight back” campaign by the DA's forebear, the Democratic Party, during the 1999 elections, which was denounced as racially divisive and an attack on black leaders and the rising black middle class.
But Zille, in response to questions from the Sunday Times, said they had no regrets for conceptualising and airing the ad, despite the public backlash.
“No, not at all,” she said.
Zille said it was crucial for the DA to run an ad of this nature to demonstrate to voters the “high stakes” in the elections on May 29.
“The rationale behind the ad is to inform voters how high the stakes are in this election. How South Africans vote will determine whether we can save everything the flag represents.
“Only the DA is big enough, honest enough and experienced enough to realise the South Africa envisaged in 1994.”
The controversial ad was conceptualised by the DA’s internal film crew and marketing team and approved by a federal executive structure.
“It was approved by the FedEx oversight group which is delegated to approve election advertising,” said Zille.
Political analyst Judith February said while the DA was allowed free speech, the wisdom of putting out such an ad had to be questioned.
February said it appeared the ad was a strategy to galvanise the DA's core support base to come out in large numbers to vote rather than an attempt to attract new voters.
“It’s obviously free speech and the DA is free to do it. The question is whether this is wise,” she said.
It’s obviously free speech and the DA is free to do it. The question is whether this is wise
— Political analyst Judith February
“It also puts itself firmly in the category of a party not truly serious about capturing the vote of black South Africans but rather preferring to fish in insular waters.
“Given its leadership structure and its past few turbulent years, we should not be surprised. Under Zille and [John] Steenhuisen the party has regressed into a laager, content to hear only those who agree with it.
“The result of that is this kind of egregious ad.”
February argued that the DA needed to reconsider its strategies if was serious about winning over the majority of South Africans.
“The ad also does a disservice to decent public servants such as [Cape Town mayor] Geordin Hill-Lewis, [Western Cape premier] Alan Winde and [uMgeni mayor] Chris Pappas, who try to portray a more inclusive image.
“The DA needs a strategic reboot if it wants to stand a chance to win the hearts and minds of the majority of South Africans.”
Turning to the SABC’s decision to can the ad, which has been described by Steenhuisen as an act of censorship, Zille said the party would fight the public broadcaster on this.
“We will fight them, starting with Icasa (Independent Communications Authority of South Africa ) [and] through the courts,” she said.
The SABC has asked the DA to amend the ad, saying it encouraged the destruction of national symbols, which was not consistent with its mandate as public broadcaster.
Zille said the DA campaign message of “Rescue SA” was resonating with its supporters and potential new voters.
“It has been a strong, fighting campaign, as indeed it should be,” she said.
“The stakes are enormously high and we have brought that home to every South African.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.