While the government of South Africa has outwardly promoted democracy since 1983, it nonetheless has placed its press under tight constraint to discourage dissent concerning political issues and enhance the government's credibility. Not only are journalists within the country restricted, but foreign correspondents as well. Moreover, although there are no official censors, censorship is implied by the laws because journalists are restrained from commenting freely and the subject matter on which they may report is limited to issues that are not contentious. The laws are so vague that journalists could easily report something the government subsequently objects to, which engenders a form of self-censorship. South Africa's government states that its mission is democracy, but its reaction concerning free speech contradicts its assertions. A free press is necessary to a democracy because it promotes discussion and dissent, which in turn fosters public consensus. The government, however, believes a free press to be dangerous to its well-being until a democracy is established. South Africa's government needs to understand that a free press is not a product of a democracy but an essential element of the process of peaceful change. (Forty-three references are included.) (JC)