|
Back to Index
Independence
celebrations
Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe (MMPZ)
Extracted
from Weekly Media Update 2004-15
Monday April 12th - Sunday April 18th 2004
The government
media’s coverage of the country’s 24th Independence anniversary
further underscored their status as unbridled conduits of ZANU PF
propaganda. They merely regurgitated government assertions that
the 24th anniversary was historic as it represented the
peak of the country’s socio-political and economic successes, as
exemplified by the repossession of land from the minority whites.
This slavish
coverage was clearly illustrated by the manner in which ZBC handled
the issue.
The government
broadcaster (ZTV, Power FM and Radio Zimbabwe) bombarded its audiences
with a total of 114 stories on the country’s independence in its
main news bulletins of the week. Of these, 41 (36 percent) reminded
the public about the importance of commemorating independence. The
stories also challenged people to "jealously guard the
gains of the country’s liberation struggle"
and emulate the lives of the late liberation war heroes who devoted
their lives to the country.
Forty-three
(38 percent) were on the preparations for the countrywide celebrations,
while 21 stories (18 percent) were reports of the actual event itself.
Nine (8 percent) of them linked the country’s Independence to the
government’s self-proclaimed achievements, such as the resettlement
of the landless.
In addition,
ZBC’s stations carried excerpts of old speeches made by the country’s
heroes during the war. Recent speeches made by President Mugabe
were also aired. Old liberation struggle songs were played on all
ZBC’s radio stations.
The frenzy culminated
in an overnight live coverage of a musical show held in Hwange on
April 17. But this over-zealous allocation of airtime to the event
did not translate into an honest evaluation of issues, especially
the effects of agrarian reforms, which government and its media
advertised as the hallmark of its achievements and therefore a source
for celebration.
Besides, the
broadcaster and the government Press were also blind to how government,
under the pretext of empowering the disadvantaged and safeguarding
the country’s sovereignty, had totally subverted Zimbabweans’ basic
rights as a people.
The Manica
Post (16/4) made an ironic reference to it when the paper quoted
ruling party stalwart Oppah Muchinguri as having "defined
independence as total freedom of expression and respect for human
rights" adding that "it (independence) means
freedom to associate, vote, own property, excel in business, as
well as respect for fundamental human rights."
However, there
was no attempt by the paper to measure such bland rhetoric against
the arsenal of hostile laws, such as the Access to Information and
Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA), the Broadcasting Services Act
(BSA) and the Public Order and Security Act (POSA), which have massively
eroded Zimbabweans’ rights.
Only the private
media tried to explore this area, although their analyses were often
distracted by the economic crisis rather than focussing on the wholesale
erosion of the country’s civil rights too.
The Financial
Gazette, for example, quoted constitutional law expert Lovemore
Madhuku as tracing Zimbabwe’s woes from between 1980 and 1994 when
Zimbabwe moved from "a parliamentary system of enacting
laws to a presidential system" as illustrated by the
fact that of the 17 amendments made to the Constitution since independence
most were focused on concentrating power in the hands of the Executive.
Added Madhuku:
"It (the constitution) had detrimental effects on the
economy and the society in that there is no benefit of a free flow
of ideas." Studio 7 (13 & 16/4) and SW Radio Africa
(16/4) echoed similar views.
And The Zimbabwe
Independent story, You may rejoice, I must mourn also
referred to the systematic erosion of people’s freedoms by the government
since the attainment of independence in 1980. It noted that the
ruling party "has remained entombed in the revolutionary
mantra that it alone brought freedom and therefore it should be
the custodian and dispenser of all freedoms and rights. Anyone demanding
extra rights outside the prescribed ones is considered…an enemy
of the state."
This observation
found relevance in government media reports, which unquestioningly
allowed the ruling party to selfishly own the liberation struggle
and consequently monopolise independence proceedings. But surprisingly,
the private media accessed little comment on this brazen theft of
an important national event in the name of narrow political interests
and the government media were allowed to get away with the deification
of the ruling party and the President.
The Herald
(12/4), for example, depicted President Mugabe as a faultless revolutionary
legend, persecuted by his enemies for, among other reasons, his
magnanimity, forgiving nature, love for peace and unity, benefiting
"previously deprived Africans", achieving
social justice, and fighting graft "everywhere, including
in his own party and government".
The Herald
(14,15,16&17/4), Chronicle (15/4) and The Sunday Mirror
(18/4) stories were tailored in the same way, either hallowing Mugabe’s
achievements or that of his party. The Sunday Mirror story
especially simplistically described Mugabe as "a legendary
hero of all times" without examining his contemporary
record of governance.
Visit the MMPZ
fact sheet
Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.
TOP
|
