Talk:Jani Allan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Untitled

Sunday Times 28 January 1990 People;Jani Allan;Writer haunted by a hunk with blowtorch eyes By Stuart Wavell

(Redacted)


NPOV

This article still reads to me a like a defence of Jani Allan, who is not perceived positively by the general public in SA. The fact that the article has been written primarily by single individual -- Teatreez -- is cause for concern. This user appears to have an obssession with arguing against Jani's public image, and the encyclopaedic nature of the article is compromised because of this. The article is also far too long and contains detailed legal explanations in support of Teatreez's view of Allan. EmjayE2 (talk) 17:33, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the inconsistencies of the libel case are partly responsible for why it became such an international news story. Although it was British publications such as The Sunday Times and The Independent that gave considerable air time to the dirty tricks and suspicions, it was South Africa's Financial Mail that outright alleged that the case may have been orchestrated by De Klerk. I mention the respective news publications and their reportage of the case. Also in the instance that I mention Allan's suspicions about Myburgh being a state agent, I make it clear that this is Allan's personal query. It also isn't a fanciful defence as Allan's spy speculation is just one in the line of many that have been charged against Myburgh. In some instances in the libel section I have focused on Allan's reactions and quotes. I think that as this is the Jani Allan article and as she is the litigant, it is particularly relevant that her reactions are cited.

response

Bollocks. It is exactly because Jani is the subject of the article that it shouldn't focus too much on her own comments. This is like saying that an article about Hitler should quote mainly him. There's a reason why Wikipedia doesn't want subjects to write and edit their own articles. EmjayE2 (talk) 20:43, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

T-response

Yes but with all due respect, there is quite a difference between a litigant in a defamation case and a mass-murderer. Hitler's actions are indefensible, whereas Allan's affair allegation was not sufficiently proved outright nor was it fully disproved.

It should also be said that most of the quotes I have used were widely republished, nearly every George Carman obit included her "Whatever award is given for libel, being cross-examined by you would not make it enough money." as well as her bloodless abbatoir comparisons. These were also commonly republished during the trial. If you think other quotes would benefit then feel free and add, I have already added Carman's quote that the case had "international, social, political and cultural implications."Teatreez (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Teatreez (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC) Her profile in not solely in South Africa, she garnered considerable attention in the UK when she sued Channel 4. But she also received some attention for her earlier work as a society columnist at the London Sunday Times as well as her post-trial pieces in the London Evening Standard and Spectator magazine. Not just any South African journo gets to add publications like these to their CV. She did a series of columns for the London Sunday Times in 1990 (pre-trial), including society pieces, an interview with Charlton Heston and opinion pieces. These are certainly pretigous assignments, she would have been given these on the back of her career in SA. It should also be remembered that in 1990, the London Sunday Times was in no way affiliated with her Johannesburg counterpart.[reply]

response

I agree that her profile is not only SA, but she's a joke everywhere. Writing for the London Sunday Times, etc. is not such a big deal. Lots of SA journos have written for these publications, and more regularly than Jani appears to have. Her journo reputation was discredited by the alleged affair. EmjayE2 (talk) 20:43, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

T-response

Everywhere is a bit broad. There wasn't the same level of reportage in America about the court case as there was in the UK. She published two articles for WND, the conservative website has hosted some questionable content in the past. But pundits and WND columnists such as Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter do feature in the mainstream American media.

Besides not just any SA journalist comes out on top on a Gallup Poll to find the most admired person in South Africa. There are other SA journalists that have written for British publications.

But perhaps one of the reasons that Allan was such a public personality is that she was perhaps the only SA journalist that was simultaneously a celebrity. She interviewed South Africa's top celebrities and later the political heavyweights but was frequently as famous or even more so than her interviewee.

Here are some references to this in 2009 by SA journos, There was a case quite a long time ago involving a leading Sunday columnist who fell for the charms of militant rightwinger Eugene Terre'blanche.... No one held back in those days, just because she was a journalist. But then, she was more of a celebrity than the rest of us. http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=vn20090225012053882C487727

celebrity journalist Jani Allan http://www.thetimes.co.za/Columnists/News/Article.aspx?id=963875 Teatreez (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would also disagree with any notion that she is only remembered because of the affair allegations. She had already became a household name by the time she even interviewed Terre'Blanche. I do think it is essential to have the sunday times in the opening lines so I've made a little edit there. As she was there from the late 70s to late 80s, she became much more synonymous with the newspaper than with anywhere else. The Sunday Times fits best with the South African public perception of her career as many people in Gauteng would not be familiar with Cape Talk.


response

I disagree. Do a search on google books. Every single book that mentions Jani mention her in relation to the affair, and they don't even bother to call it an alleged affair.

From 'The Art of the SA Insult' by Sarah Britten: "Twenty years later, the affair between Jani Allan and Eugene Terre'Blance produced what was until recently the most famous instance of SA intercourse. It certainly brought to light the most famous pair of underpants in SA history. When Jani Allan interview the AWB leader she produced prose turgid enough to induce nausea and vomiting in a Mills & Boon editor. 'Eugene Terre'Blanch doesn't walk into a room; he takes occupation of it,' she gushed to incredulous readers of the Sunday Times. 'To be honest, he's a hunk.' His composure was 'cool as a slice of melktert'; his voice alternating between 'the loamy texture of a newly ploughed mielie field' and 'a caress of worn corduroy'

Details of her fornication with ET might never have come to light had she not sued a London newspaper for alleging that they had an affair.

Linda Shaw, her roommate, was called to testify. She reported that Jani claimed that ET was 'a great lay but a little heavy', etc. etc." EmjayE2 (talk) 20:43, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

T-response

Yes but the Britten book is a satire. As for not saying it was an alleged affair, well the British judge did not state that an affair had taken place and even Linda Shaw was cagey about saying this when she was interviewed in 2006- http://www.mnet.co.za/Mnet/Shows/carteblanche/story.asp?Id=3021

Britten isn't the only one to make the mistake but it is her libel proceedings against the broadcaster Channel 4 that led to more details emerging, nothing to do with her suing The People as I think was mentioned. It is true that she successfully sued the London Evening Standard earlier but that was settled out of court.

It varies, some books and newspapers use alleged and others don't. For example,Jani Allan (1970s model and alleged mistress of Eugene Terre'Blanche, in the 2002 architecture book 'Archis'. Terreblanche lost some of his personal popularity after his name was linked with that of Sunday Times columnist Jani Allen in 'Imagery of identity in South African education, 1880-1990'‎ - Page 142.

The most recent reference to the association was in news24's entertainment offshoot 'Journalist Jani Allan’s alleged affair with rightwing AWB leader Eugène Terre'Blanche.' and they use the word alleged. http://www.channel24.co.za/Content/Gossip/633/f243ce5cc8fc44408719a5d7520e50e1/01-01-0001%2012-01/What_you_can_learn_from_celebrity_sex_scandals

As for Linda Shaw, she regretted testifying and compared her experience to a Yugoslavia war crime trial. Her own personal life was probed and inconsistencies were reported in her story and her character was brought into question. I have noted the impact she had for the defense though.

Legally it seems that the correct terminology is alleged. Teatreez (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Allan has her detractors but she is not without her supporters. The affair allegation has dogged her, but she did have a relative comeback in South Africa in 1996. Someone that is incredibly unpopular does not get given the cover of a magazine to mark their return, nor are they given a new column and radio show. As I understand it, she left South Africa because of security reasons in 2001. Her subsequent gun control, traditional healer and crime articles have been celebrated by some and opposed by others, including Thabo Mbeki for example. In terms of her career, I would say that most South Africans would be more familiar with her Sunday Times columns rather than an appearance on an American radio show or the couple of columns published on WND.

response

Please show me evidence of celebration of her later work that doesn't come from a right-wing source ... EmjayE2 (talk) 20:43, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

T-response

Post-case, she published for the London Evening Standard (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/diary-1551528.html) Court report DILIGENTLY watching George Carman QC open for the People in the Mona Bauwens libel case yesterday was a recent victim of the grand inquisitor, Eugene Terre-Blanche's former intimate, Jani Allan. She was sitting but a few feet from Carman - whom she has since memorably described as resembling a 'small bewigged ferret' - preparing an article for the London Evening Standard.

The Spectator- (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/jani-allan-bites-back-at-ferret-1541792.html) Mr Carman, counsel for Channel 4, who cross-examined her at length in the High Court last month, is described by Miss Allan as 'a small bewigged ferret' in today's issue of the Spectator.

I do not have accesss to The Spectator or LES archives, these references just pieces that the Independent picked up on at the time. But seeing as Allan was in 1996, I assume there were more publications and pieces but it can be difficult to track down such archives and so I have provided what is available.

She returned to South Africa in 1996 and appeared on the cover of Style magazine- http://www.iblog.co.za/wp-content/blogs.dir/18097/uploads//Jani%20Allan%20on%20Style%20cover.jpg

Between 1997-2000 she was a host on Cape Talk's 'Jani's World' and hosted the Mweb site CyberJani.

She published two freelance pieces on WorldNetDaily, a conservative new website. But a site that has conservative pundits that appear in the mainstream American media, i.e. Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly.

On the blogosphere her fellow scribes have mentioned that she is working on her memoirs, perhaps the true public perception will be revealed in the reactions of South Africans. In particular I would say that several opinion journalist explain her character as enigmatic, thus public perception is often divided. Teatreez (talk) 21:48, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

response

I don't think that calling somebody enigmatic amounts to divided opinion. I urge you to use your interest in Jani to write a biography of her. What you are doing here amounts to original research, and "Wikipedia does not publish original research or original thought. This includes unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position. This means that Wikipedia is not the place to publish your own opinions, experiences, arguments, or conclusions."

I contend that the kinds of intricate defences and explanations and trivial details that you include in this article are not suited to Wikipedia. I agree that Jani has perhaps been vilified and become the butt of jokes in rather a cruel manner, and that that is interesting, but it's a separate issue. It's akin to writing a defence of Mbeki's AIDS policy ... By all means, go ahead, but not on Wikipedia.

EmjayE2 (talk) 20:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


T-response

I would contend that opinion is still divided amongst some. Lin Sampson is a respected columnist in South Africa, she interviewed Allan in 1995 and described the rage against Allan as "the first public showing of what would become the new South African psychosis".

I did research articles and such, but everything is very well-referenced. I feel like the article would have major gaps if I hadn't checked archives and such. To be frank, I don't try and orchestrate the public opinion. I simply lay down the tumultuous events in the court case and research her career.

I don't make arguments or publish original opinion, everything is mainly referenced by reliable books and reliable British (non-tabloid) newspapers. I have also used some South African references that tend to be reputable sites such as news24, and some local newspapers such as the Sunday Times and the Sunday Independent.

I do not have access to full court reports in the SA Sunday Times, this may be interpreted as a disadvantage even as this was South Africa's largest newspaper at the time. In South Africa, the Sunday Times was recognised as the most vociferous in its reportage of the case. The newspaper had two employees (Linda Shaw and Marlene Burger) acting as Channel 4 witnesses against the former ST columnist, Allan. There are ethical questions about this, thus I feel that the Independent provides a relatively reliable account from a quality newspaper with more resources than a South African title could muster. It is also the only large title with open (non-pay) archives that go back to 1992. As a a centre-left publication it also cannot be suspected of sympathies with Terre'Blanche. Teatreez (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV,...

i'm not sure WHICH wiki guidelines are violated thereby but the "main editor" of this article seems to have a conflict of interest regarding the article's subject and the article is generally too vainglorious (in no relation to the importance of this person and her actions and experiences) and too close to be a personal hp of the person. just because newspaper xy has reported this or that about z does not mean it's worth mentioning this on wikipedia. for the longest time this person was nothing but an astrologer of a small gazette.--Severino (talk) 12:17, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would seem that publishing horoscopes in a local gazette for two years was an interest of hers. Not long after this time, she published for some large American news web sites such as WND and made some radio appearances. Yet as a journalist she is best-known for writing for the Sunday Times for over a decade, publishing two successful columns and an accompanying book in this time. In a 1987 search/poll for South Africa's most admired person, she came out on top. During her time in London she published a series of opinion and society pieces for the London Sunday Times and was also published in the Spectator and London Evening Standard. In Cape Town perhaps, she will be remembered for her radio show on Cape Talk in the late 1990s. Mr Terre'Blanche's recent death has cast her name back into international newspaper pages, and this combined with her upcoming memoirs certainly plucks her from relative obscurity.Teatreez (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i didn't expect you to see reason so my comment wasn't aimed at you. although, i know it's hard to aim sth. here to so. else due to lacking of interest for the article's subject.--Severino (talk) 15:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Jani Allan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:55, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jani Allan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:47, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on Jani Allan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:35, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jani_Allan&oldid=1204722474"