Radio
Podcasts
In The Ring With Eusebius McKaiser

In The Ring With Eusebius McKaiser

Eusebius

On In The Ring With Eusebius McKaiser I tackle all the uncomfortable topics that dominate public debate. With my reputation for fearless debate as a former World Masters Debate Champ, and a background in law and philosophy, you can expect debates on everything from whether or not it is racist for a non-black person to quote the N-word, to questions of how to tackle inequality, whether people are responsible for unconscious biases, the ethics of refusing to be vaccinated, the status of animals, debating books, and much more! The crucial differentiator of this podcast series compared to others is that it is fearless in its debate orientation, and no topic is off bounds! However, my motto is: "You are entitled to be treated with dignity .... but NOT to have your worldview affirmed!" So come with well-considered reasons for your viewpoints when you get YOUR chance to come on the platform to In The Ring With Eusebius McKaiser

Categories: Arts

Listen to the last episode:

In this edition of In The Ring, I analyse Prince Mashele's responses in interviews granted to eNCA, 702 and the SABC, in light of media reports that he had, ok the face of it, been dishonest about the nature of his biography of Herman Mashaba.

Herman Mashaba is leader of politica part ActionSA, and prior to that was always known as a very successful businessman in an against-all-odds tale at the height of apartheid; in recent years he a new career pivot that had also seen him becoming mayor of Johannesburg.

Mashele, a well-known South African political analyst, had claimed that he had "self-funded" his book on Mashaba, and the subtitle of the book declared it to be "unauthorised".

It has emerged that Mashaba had provided funding for the book, and had engaged the author on drafts of the chapter.

This raises sharp ethical questions: was the work unauthorised or authtoised ? Did Mashele lie on eNCA? Did Mashele WRONGLY withheld the information from Jonathan Ball ? What, most importantly, are the consequences for the professional integrity of the author? And what are we to make of the other actors in this drama: the subject; the publisher; the researcher/former best friend Brutus Malada who 'blew the whistle'?

Have a listen to my uhm unauthorised take.