Tentatively emerging from a global pandemic, we are confronted with a horizon of immanent adversities: (1) the closing window for altering the trajectory of our climate crisis, (2) the political antagonisms that exacerbate greater polarization, and (3) the effects oflate-stage capitalism that service these first two interconnected configurations. Far from indulging a doomsday pessimism or comfortable misanthropy, this article pursues two continental philosophers, situating them within the tradition of "negative political theology" to think through a future of nothingness. Developing and then distinguishing between what is called the "plastic apocalypticism" of the philosopher Catherine Malabou, which thinks the end of the world as such, and an "insistent messianic" of the radical theologian, John D. Caputo, which takes the end of the world as the condition for saving it, an argument is made in favour of a mutual compatibility - recognizing the passing away of this world, its absolute contingency, but also the "event" of God's insistence. This messianic insistence and plastic revelation both resist divine intervention and instead look toward the formation of a new future, just as such a future (of nothingness) is the condition for the persistent interrogative of all concrete political arrangements.

Pre-trial publicity regarding a pending criminal case, which publicity may be in the form of media coverage of the case or a prior decision given in parallel judicial proceedings arising from substantially the same facts as the criminal matter, may be adverse to an accused. Such media publicity or findings contained in the parallel judicial decision may implicate the accused in the commission of the crime on which he or she is to stand trial. The publicity may, for example, suggest that the accused is "guilty" of the crime charged, or that the accused is of bad character having had the propensity to commit the crime. Conversely, pre-trial publicity may portray the accused as innocent of any criminal wrongdoing. In other words, pre-trial publicity may prejudge the issues that are to be adjudicated on at trial. A central question that may arise in these instances is whether there is a real and substantial risk that such publicity would materially affect or prejudice the impartial adjudication of the criminal case; that is to say, whether the publicity is likely to have a biasing effect on the trial court in the adjudication process or the outcome of the trial, thereby imperilling the constitutional right to a fair trial. Another key consideration, in respect of which there is scant literature and case-law, is the question of the impact which adverse pre-trial publicity may have on the prosecutor in instituting and conducting a prosecution. Being unduly influenced by such publicity, a prosecutor may impinge upon the accused's right to a fair trial. There is also a dearth of authority on how the prosecutor is to function in the face of pre-trial publicity which may be prejudicial to the accused. This article seeks to explore these aspects vis-â-vis the prosecutor. It is posited that in an adversarial criminal justice system the same level of impartiality required of the presiding judicial officer is not required of the prosecutor, and that prosecutorial bias towards the guilt of an accused is inevitable where the prosecutor decides to institute a prosecution after studying the police case docket. Thus, exposure of the prosecutor to virulent pre-trial publicity would not be inimical to the fair disposition of the accused's trial provided that the prosecutor conducts the trial fairly and without undue prejudice to the accused and is dedicated to assisting the court in arriving at the truth. Moreover, additional knowledge and understanding of a case which a prosecutor gains from an extraneous source does not amount to bias or prejudice.

This article, "Koos says...": A critical discourse analysis of the meta-capital of a prominent South African media tycoon, engages the public statements of Koos Bekker, CEO of Africa's largest media company, Naspers. Bekker is renowned as a visionary entrepreneur and has made a personal fortune in the process of taking Naspers from a national and rather sectarian print-based media company to an international digital television and e-commerce concern. The aim of the article is to analyse and describe the discursive power relations in which Bekker is situated. In the last few decades, Bekker received much media coverage, and also contributed a number of opinion pieces to the newspapers owned by Naspers. The argument here is that he functions as an opinion leader by virtue of his influence and standing in the field of business, and the "meta-capital" (Bourdieu & Wacquant 1992; Couldry 2003) it affords him - in part due to media access and exposure -across other fields in society. In this regard the article refers to the discourse theory of Michel Foucault and the comparable work of Pierre Bourdieu on the link between language and power. According to this view, language is the medium of construction and circulation of knowledge/power in society. Those who have access to the media, are able to influence the construction of readers' reality. Flowing from this theoretical framework is the methodology of critical discourse analysis, as it was developed by Norman Fairclough and Teun van Dijk. Thus the analysis takes place on three levels - text, context of production, and the larger context of society. The analysis focused on a number of selected articles, in the main interviews with or opinion pieces written by Bekker, in which he commented on issues outside his primary field of interest, Naspers and the media. The following eight discursive themes emerged: (Koos Bekker as) supporter of Darwinian evolution theory, critical patriot, champion for Afrikaans, critic of some Afrikaners, honorary Chinese citizen, strategic opinion leader, informed casual writer, and youth "worshipper". It was noted that Bekker occasionally moved close to institutional power, for example as a member of the Board of Stellenbosch University, and the Bid and Local Organising Committee of the 2010 Fifa Soccer World Cup. Interestingly, on at least two occasions Bekker engaged critically with the views of two former National Party ministers, Naspers'former allies, in opinion pieces. In the first instance Bekker displayed relative conservative views on the maintenance of Afrikaans at South African universities, and in the second case he argued against conservative Afrikaners who tried to stop Stellenbosch University from awarding an honorary doctorate to deceased (Afrikaner Communist) freedom fighter Bram Fischer. Thus, the CDA found that Bekker displayed a complex positioning towards Afrikaans and Afrikaners. On the one hand he clearly identified with "white" and "brown" Afrikaans speakers of a younger generation. His argument was that they should not be blamed for the "sins" of apartheid because they were born after the fact. But Bekker had far less empathy for the older generation of white Afrikaners. He identified two "types", on the one hand those who had become bitter and reactionary about the loss of political power, and on the other those who had resigned themselves to an inferior position for their language and culture. Writing in English for a wider audience on some occasions, Bekker emphasised South African inclusiveness and diversity as the key to unlocking the potential of the country. He was generally optimistic about the "new" South Africa, but also cautioned against tendencies such as "cader deployment" and a devisive polarisation between black and white. It is argued in closing that his informed style and rhetoric displayed a sense of careful and strategic planning, dressed down by seeming nonchalance and a deliberate informal approach.

Hierdie artikel onderneem 'n kritiese diskoersanalise van die openbare uitsprake van die Afrikaanse mediamagnaat Koos Bekker van Naspers-faam, sodat die diskursiewe magsverhoudings waarbinne hy hom bevind duideliker omskryf kan word. Behalwe dat Bekker baie media-blootstelling gekry het, het hy die afgelope dekade of meer ook verskeie meningsartikels tot die koerante van Naspers bygedra, en die argument is dat hy as 'n invloedryke meningsvormer (die draer van "meta-kapitaal" in n Bourdieuaanse sin) in die samelewing funksioneer. In dié verband verwys die artikel na die diskoersteorie van Foucault en Bourdieu se vergelykbare teorieë oor die verband tussen taalgebruik en magsuitoefening. Daaruit vloei die metodiek van kritiese diskoersanalise, wat na aanleiding van die werk van Fairclough en Van Dijk hier op drie vlakke - teks, konteks van produksie, en samelewingskonteks - geskied. Die bevinding van die artikel is onder meer dat Bekker se komplekse posisionering ten opsigte van Afrikaans en Afrikaners gekenmerk word deur 'n identifisering met wit en bruin Afrikaanse jeugdiges, maar dat hy minder begrip vertoon vir die ouer geslag wit Afrikaners. Bekker beklemtoon ook gereeld die positiewe aspekte van kulturele inklusiwiteit en diversiteit, en is oor die algemeen optimisties, maar by tye ook skerp krities oor die "nuwe" Suid-Afrika. Sy skryfstyl, keuse van onderwerpe en publikasieplatforms getuig van strategiese berekendheid.