SECTOR 4 There seems be a ‘gentlemen’s agreement’ that one media house will not criticise or share information about the working conditions at another media house. It was felt that “there is no support for journalists from within the industry”. However, panellists asserted that “there should be general minimum working conditions that should be observed across the board”. To achieve that, there needs to be a workable model of representation for journalists or media workers in Namibia. It was observed that generally, “Namibians are scared for unions to be opened by individuals, but we need to look at existing unions and whether they are upholding their mandate”. Scores: Individual scores: 1 Country does not meet indicator 2 Country meets only a few aspects of indicator 3 Country meets some aspects of indicator 4 Country meets most aspects of indicator 5 Country meets all aspects of the indicator Average score: 1.4 (2005: 2.8; 2007: 3.0; 2009: 2.4; 2011: 1.6) 4.5 Journalists and media houses have integrity and are not corrupt. While overall journalists and media houses are not corrupt in Namibia, it was noted that “there is a creeping risk of corruption particularly in private media houses”. In the absence of good regular pay, one panellist stated, “certain journalists are offered very high ‘salaries’ to become stenographers of the state”. At the same time, considering that so many media houses depend on a relatively small advertising market, it makes certain companies impervious to critique. Making this point, one panellist stated, “Pupkewtiz and Olthaver & List are the untouchables for The Namibian,” and at the New Era “there is a social clique where certain personalities are untouchable.” Supporting this point, it was asserted, “You can write the story but it will never make into the paper even if you think it is THE story”. AFRICAN MEDIA BAROMETER NAMIBIA 2015 59