Back to Index

Media Environment in Zimbabwe Prior to the March 2005 Elections
Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe
March 30, 2005

The national public broadcasting corporation, ZBH, has failed to fulfil its public mandate to provide ‘balanced, fair, complete and accurate’ coverage of the March 2005 parliamentary election campaign as stipulated under the Broadcasting Services (Access to radio and television during an election) Regulations gazetted in February 2005.

While opposition parties and independent candidates have been officially allowed access to Zimbabwe’s electronic media for the first time during an election campaign, news and current affairs coverage both prior to and after the start of the February 26 ‘election period’¹, was extensively biased in favour of the ruling party, ZANU PF.

Democracy depends upon an electorate that is capable of making informed choices. It is therefore the duty of the national public broadcaster to grant political parties equitable access to its airwaves at all times and not just before elections. The imposition of a 33-day "election period" as set out by Zimbabwe’s broadcasting laws, is an arbitrary figure set by an interested party that implies a limit to ZBH’s public service mandate which in itself undermines basic principles of democratic practice; the right to know and to be informed. For this reason MMPZ has assessed access to the media and election coverage from 1 January 2005, as well as coverage during the "election period".

MMPZ’s findings show that between 1 January and 29 March the main stations of Zimbabwe Broadcasting Holdings (ZTV, Radio Zimbabwe and Power FM) carried a total of 408 election campaign stories covering the activities of ZANU PF and the opposition MDC. Of these, 346 (85%) were on ZANU PF while 62 (15%) were on MDC. Although coverage of the MDC was generally neutral, coverage of ZANU PF was used to either to denigrate the MDC or to portray the ruling party positively.

The distribution of time allocated to the two main political parties’ campaigns on ZTV (6pm & 8pm bulletins) illustrates this bias even more starkly. Of the 12 hours 23 minutes allocated to both political parties in the 12 weeks between 1 January and 29 March, the national public broadcaster gave ZANU PF 11 hours and 29 minutes (93%), while 54 minutes (7%) were given to the MDC. For example, when ZANU PF launched its campaign on February 11, ZTV allocated 18 minutes of its 8pm news bulletin to covering the launch. The station subsequently devoted an additional 13 minutes 15 seconds in its evening news bulletins of February 12^th and 13^th to the ruling party’s campaign launch. In contrast, ZTV gave the MDC’s campaign launch only 2 minutes 35 seconds on February 20, the day of the event, with no further coverage.

MMPZ’s findings also revealed blatant bias by ZTV even in the ‘election period’ where ZBH is obliged by law to provide a ‘fair, balanced, accurate and complete’ service when covering elections. Between February 26 and March 29, 4 hours and 44 minutes (87%) were allocated to ZANU PF while only 41 minutes (13%) were allocated to MDC.

Time allocated to ZANU PF and MDC on TV: February 26th - March 29th 2005

With regard to "election programmes" specially accorded to contesting parties and candidates in terms of the Broadcasting Services Regulations, allocation of access between political parties and independent candidates between 26 February and 29 March was as follows:

MMPZ noted that in the interviews and discussion programmes allocated to the MDC, ZBH panellists persistently interrupted responses from the opposition party representatives to allegations made by the panellists.

In contrast, interviews and discussion programmes held with members of ZANU PF were handled in a considerably less hostile manner. Ruling party officials were allowed to comment without interruption and instead of posing questions on ZANU PF’s policies, in most cases the panellists asked the ruling party representatives to respond to positions taken by the MDC during their interviews. During the discussion programme aired on March 29^th, the invited members of ZANU PF appeared to be answering questions from notes made according to questions they had been furnished with earlier.

The biased approach of the questioning during these programmes was clearly structured in a way that was designed to further discredit the opposition and enhance the image of the ruling party.

With regards to print media, the newspapers in the government-controlled Zimpapers stable, failed the Zimbabwean public and the journalistic profession with their blatantly biased coverage of election issues. Since the year 2000 these newspapers have been used as a propaganda tool to enhance the image of the ZANU PF government and to attack and discredit the political opposition. Little has changed during the 2005 election campaign period. The insulting and abusive nature of these newspapers’ reports on the opposition and government critics was only toned down following the departure of the former Information Minister, Jonathan Moyo. But the bias remains the same. For example in the week beginning Monday 14 March and ending Sunday 20 March 2005, out of the 64 campaign stories carried in The Herald, the Chronicle, The Sunday Mail, the Sunday News and The Manica Post, 52 (81%) were on ZANU PF, 11 (17%) on the MDC and only one story (2%) on independent candidates. Smaller opposition parties were not covered. Those stories covering the MDC were almost all used to discredit the opposition.

While MMPZ welcomed the regulations granting political parties’ access to the electronic media prior to the March 2005 parliamentary election as a positive development, we condemn the flagrant bias in news coverage of election issues. ZBH has made no attempt to disguise its favour of the ruling party at the expense of other contesting parties. Such distorted election coverage clearly violates the spirit of the SADC guidelines on equal access to the media and has inevitably deprived Zimbabweans of their right to access information on the activities of the main contesting parties in order that they can make informed electoral choices.

It should also be noted that the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional the monopoly of the airwaves enjoyed by ZBH in the year 2000 on the grounds that it interfered with Zimbabweans’ rights to freedom of expression. However, ZBH has been allowed to continue holding this ‘de facto’ monopoly in violation of this ruling.

Visit the MMPZ fact sheet

1 Defined in the Broadcasting Services Act as 33 days before polling day.

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