By: Isaac Kwabena Boadu Date: 19th May. 2026
During South Africa’s apartheid era, the country’s largest white-owned newspapers produced parallel editions aimed at Black readers in the townships. These “town” or “Africa” editions were not independent papers, but modified versions of mainstream dailies like The Star, The Argus, and The Cape Times, reshaped to fit censorship laws and a segregated market.
One title, multiple editions
It worked as one newspaper title printed in separate editions for different reader groups and areas.
The Star is the clearest example. The company ran:
- The “main” or “white” edition sold in white suburbs and CBDs
- The “Africa edition” sold in Black townships like Soweto
Both carried The Star masthead and came from the same printing press, but the content inside was swapped before printing. If you bought the white edition in Johannesburg city center and the Africa edition in Soweto on the same day, you’d get different front-page stories, different headlines for the same event, and some pages completely replaced. Rugby coverage in the white edition became soccer in the Africa edition. Business pages were swapped for letters from Black readers and medical advice columns.
Distribution decided which edition you got. Newsagents in white suburbs received the white edition. Newsagents in townships got the Africa/town edition. That’s why it was called a “town edition” – it was targeted at a specific township market.
A market-driven compromise
Publishers saw the growing Black urban population as a major readership and advertising market. But strict censorship under the Internal Security Act and Public Security Act barred direct reporting on banned organizations like the ANC and prohibited quoting figures such as Nelson Mandela. To stay legal and profitable, papers created separate editions with different news selection and framing for township readers.
Different front pages, same brand
The differences were stark. On June 4, 1986, The Star’s white edition led with a business story and rugby scandal. The Africa edition led with Black residents defying police restrictions at a funeral and township council resignations under government pressure.
Headlines shifted too. When a Black woman won a house in a white suburb, the Africa edition ran “BLACK HAWKER WINS WHITE HOUSE.” The white edition softened it to “CONTEST WINNER WILL RECEIVE NEW HOME IN DAVEYTON.”
Even photos were changed. A story on cold weather used white subjects in the white edition and Black subjects in the Africa edition. The town editions were produced by white-owned media groups, including the Argus group and The Star’s publisher. Critics said the content was often “downmarket,” heavy on crime, sex, and sports, and light on political analysis. Yet during the State of Emergency after 1985, these editions sometimes carried more township unrest news than their white counterparts, since they operated under slightly different censorship constraints.
Both editions still had to follow censorship laws. Neither could print banned material. But the Africa edition could push closer to the line on township unrest and politics because that’s what its readers cared about and expected.
This system differed from independent Black-owned papers like Sowetan, Ilanga, and Speak, which faced heavier police raids, banning orders, and financial pressure. One prominent anti-apartheid paper often mistaken for Black-owned was the Rand Daily Mail. It was actually white-owned, run by the Argus group, but known for its liberal editorial stance until the government shut it down in 1985.
The town editions reflected apartheid’s attempt to control information while exploiting a new consumer market. They allowed white publishers to navigate censorship and segregation, giving township readers some coverage of their communities, even if filtered and repackaged.
AFRICAN VOICES INTERNATIONAL, FREEDOM IN AFRICA
