I REMEMBER the news as if it were yesterday. I heard on the radio that my favourite newspaper had been banned while I was in Rustenburg attending a course.

As I was far from home there was nobody to share this with since my friends were all in Jozi (before the cellphones, remember).

Well, thank God, I also played my part in making sure that we have freedom of the press.

But I am getting confused because I thought press freedom meant I would hear all sides of every story and make up my mind as to what I believe. But it seems not to be the case.

Here are just a few examples of one-sided stories that I would like to hear the other side of:

l Zimbabwe

I listen to radio every day and whenever a story from Zimbabwe is reported I only get the MDC side. I have never heard the Zanu-PF side.

l Safa

During the recent elections I read and heard only the side of the so-called transformation committee and only those regions that supported this committee, with nothing from the other side. I am left wondering if what I read about the other candidates is true or is it the journalists' views. The Radio Metro show Sports Indaba actually invited this so-called soccer expert Mamadou to ridicule out-going Safa executives and support his preferred candidate.

l Polokwane

The less said about this one the better. Informed people knew exactly what the outcome of this conference was going to be except the South African press, simply because they were trying to influence the voters.

To me this is not press freedom but it looks more like freedom to brainwash.

Mandla Setoaba, Katlehong