THE NGO NETWORK ALLIANCE PROJECT - an online community for Zimbabwean activists  
 View archive by sector
 
 
    HOME THE PROJECT DIRECTORYJOINARCHIVESEARCH E:ACTIVISMBLOGSMSFREEDOM FONELINKS CONTACT US

 

 


Back to Index

Public disclosure and celebrities: Whose right is it to know?
Fungai Machirori
July 27, 2007

http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=A11100&no=374106&rel_no=1&back_url=

A view held by many is that once a person chooses to become public figure, he or she loses all rights and privileges involved in leading a private life. This, it seems, is the quid pro quo, or the 'something for something' ideology that surrounds fame - that all accolades, adulation and respect earned should come at the price of the loss of privacy and rest from the public's glare.

And this ceaseless desire to 'know all' recently centred on Zimbabwean music legend, Oliver 'Tuku' Mtukudzi, whose HIV status disclosure in one of the local Saturday newspapers appealed to the curiosities of so many readers.

"I wasn't going to buy the newspaper, but when I saw that Tuku was going to reveal his status, I was eager to know more," said one person. In the article, Mtukudzi is quoted from another media source as saying that he does not have AIDS.

"I'll be very blunt and say that he didn't disclose anything," noted Tendayi Westerhof of the Public Personalities Against AIDS Trust (PPAAT). "People living with HIV don't have AIDS. Rather, they develop it," she added.

Westerhof herself is a public figure who has disclosed her positive HIV status, and written an autobiography about her life.

But is it really anyone's business - collectively as members of the general public - to demand to know the status of any person?

"Primarily, one's HIV status is a private thing," observed Tawanda Maguze, the Programmes Coordinator with the Patsimeredu Edutainment Trust. "No one should be pushed to disclose if they do not feel comfortable about it."

Comfortable is barely the word that one would use to describe the circumstances surrounding Mtukudzi's disclosure. For many years, rumours have been rife about his general health and HIV status, and the singer has publicly acknowledged losing members of his band, The Black Spirits, to AIDS-related illnesses. In his songs, Mutukudzi addresses the social ills of alcohol abuse, domestic violence, poverty and the unnecessary spread of HIV.

But fans have often speculated that the singer himself is HIV positive, and have waited anxiously at many concerts and events that he has performed at, for him to disclose this information.

"If I were him, I'd encourage him to lead by example in the same way he has been encouraging others in his songs," added Westerhof referring in particular to the sing Todii, in which the singer asks what shall be done about the growing HIV epidemic. "He asks us what we shall do, and I think he should lead by example and fight stigma," she said, encouraging the singer to have an HIV test and know his own status - something which he might have
already done.

But it seems that in the public's haste to know all about their leaders and heroes, especially HIV advocates and activists, they forget that they too are human beings with the inherent right to privacy, and to choose when and whether to disclose their HIV status publicly - regardless of their being either HIV positive or negative. Disclosure should only be undertaken by those who have prepared for all the possible outcomes of this, such as fearful and ignorant attitudes, as well as discrimination. But more importantly, disclosure should be a choice.

"Discloure is and remains a voluntary decision," emphasised Lynde Francis, the Director of The Centre, a local non-governmental organisation (NGO) whose mission is to provide a holistic approach to the national management of HIV and AIDS to people both infected and affected to enable them to live positively with the virus." You don't go around asking people to disclose their blood sugar level, so why should it be any different with HIV?" She added that disclosure, unless one had decided to be open about their status, should only be on a need-to-know basis as in the doctor-patient relationship, where disclosure might prove crucial.

These same arguments around disclosure have been prominent, particularly in South Africa, following the public HIV testing undertaken by South African Health Minister, Nozizwe Madlala-Routledge late last year. Anti-HIV activists and groups saw this as a positive move towards leadership appreciating the gravity of the epidemic in that country. Many have put pressure on other government officials, especially President Thabo Mbeki to also take a public HIV test.

"No one asks Bill Clinton or Bill Gates to go for a test, or to disclose their status, but they are just as committed as anyone to responding positively to HIV, "observed Francis. "This has to be a private decision."

There is of course benefit in public figures being open about HIV and their status. As Maguze noted, "If people in the public sphere disclose, it diffuses the secrecy that shrouds issues to do with HIV and AIDS." One such example is that of Lucky Mazibuko, the first South African journalist to disclose his positive HIV status, built a following for his column which sought to demystify the virus. In one of these articles, he declared of his efforts, "HIV has taught me to be selfless, to share my experience, my time, my love, my possessions and my passion with the rest of humankind."

And being passionate about HIV and AIDS work and advocacy does not mean being HIV positive, or HIV negative for that matter. Passion means concerted effort towards providing holistic interventions that will help to curb not only new infections, but potential illness in those already living with the virus. One public figure, the epitome of this vision was Omolulu Falobi, the slain Nigerian activist who was a founder member of the successful Journalists Against AIDS Network. And at his Zimbabwean memorial service held last year, tributes did not centre on anything less than the overwhelming contribution he made to the response to HIV. As one person eulogised, "His work was so profound, that I never really got the chance to ask him whether he was in fact HIV positive himself. It really didn't matter."

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP