Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

MDC split and the Senatorial poll
Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe (MMPZ)
Weekly Media Update 2005-41
Monday October 24^th – Sunday October 30^th 2005

WITH less than a month before the Senate election, the media still contained precious little information on the mechanics of conducting the poll. Instead, they remained distracted for the fourth consecutive week by the split in the opposition MDC arising from differences on whether or not to contest the election.

The media carried 103 stories on the rift within the MDC, 38 of which appeared in government papers and 28 in the private Press, while ZBH aired 22 reports (ZTV 11, Power FM six, Radio Zimbabwe five) and Studio 7 broadcast the remaining 15.

But like their coverage in previous weeks, the official media dodged making a fair and informed analysis of the root causes of the fractures within the opposition. They continued to capitalise on the development, using it as a platform to further discredit the MDC’s anti-poll faction – led by party leader Morgan Tsvangirai – as dishonourable, undemocratic and in the minority.

They reinforced this by amplifying claims by Tsvangirai’s rivals that the opposition leader had "wilfully" violated the MDC constitution by unilaterally overruling the party’s National Executive Council (NEC)’s decision to participate.

The government media’s calculated bias was summed up by The Herald’s misleading headline (25/10), MDC endorses poll, which misrepresented the nomination of MDC candidates in 26 constituencies as signifying the party’s approval of the elections. The story even expanded on this distortion by selectively interpreting the fielding of the candidates by the "pro-participation lobby", led by the party’s secretary-general, Welshman Ncube, as evidence that the group had "prevailed" over Tsvangirai.

But they evaded addressing the circumstances and criteria in which the pro-election group had selected the candidates, the constitutionality of their nomination, or the identity of the MDC officials who sanctioned their selection. It was little wonder therefore that the paper did not bother to follow up claims by Tsvangirai’s spokesman, William Bango, that the nominated MDC contestants had not "followed" the party’s "traditional candidate selection procedures".

Instead, the official media continued to present the candidates’ nomination as the harbinger of Tsvangirai’s downfall. It even suggested that the number of the MDC candidates could have been higher were it not for "allegations of intimidation and violence against those who sought to lodge their papers with the nomination courts" in Mashonaland East, Central and Manicaland. Not a single case was given as evidence.

Despite this, however, the government Press carried six editorials and opinion pieces predicting Tsvangirai’s demise.

ZBH adopted a more generally anti-MDC stance in its coverage of the divisions in the party, restraining itself from specifically targeting Tsvangirai. This was illustrated by ZTV (24/10, 8pm) whose reporter, Dorothy Mavolwane, simplistically portrayed the party as the only ones against the poll. Said Mavolwane: "While Zimbabweans across the social and political spectrum agree on the importance of having a bicameral legislative system, the…MDC has failed to field candidates in some provinces due to internal squabbles."

However, the observations contradicted earlier revelations by ZTV’s Media Watch programme (17/10), which portrayed members of the public as grossly ignorant about the Senate and its benefits.

The government media’s celebration of the MDC’s political gaffes, was also illustrated by their unquestioning coverage of allegations by Job Sikhala, MDC MP for St Mary’s, that the split was not about the Senate but a result of the scramble for funds the party had received from Ghana, Nigeria and Taiwan.

These media peddled and magnified the allegation as fact, including weaving conspiracies around it, while the government papers also used the claim as another weapon with which to malign Tsvangirai.

Without attempting to establish the truth of Sikhala’s claims, the government dailies (26/10) quoted Justice Minister Patrick Chinamasa saying government would institute an investigation into the matter under the Political Parties Finances Act because "Zimbabwe could not establish a stable democratic dispensation if foreigners continue meddling in its internal affairs…"

Although ZBH initially failed to report the funding allegation, it also peddled the matter as fact. ZTV (25/10, 8pm) even distorted the issue by claiming that the "dirty money" was for the purpose of "thwarting" the Senatorial elections. Pro-government analysts such as Tafataona Mahoso as well as at least 22 members of the public were accessed to malign the MDC over the allegation.

Although at the end of the week The Herald (28/10) carried Ghana’s rebuttal of the funding allegation, it was buried deep inside Sikhala’s own retraction, which the paper however dismissed as driven by his party’s attempts to "stave off police investigations". ZBH totally ignored Ghana’s denial.

The partisan nature in which ZBH covered the subject was reflected in its over dependence on ruling party voices as shown in Fig 1. All alternative voices merely echoed the government’s position on the senate poll and so were most of the opinions sourced from the ordinary members of the public.

Fig 1 Voice distribution on ZBH

Although the government Press sought comment from both MDC factions, it drowned Tsvangirai’s position in lengthy comments from the pro-participation faction. The voice distribution in the official Press is shown in Fig 2.

Fig 2 Sourcing pattern of the government Press

Notably, all legal experts were quoted questioning Tsvangirai’s leadership.

But while the government media seemed to relish reporting on the imperfections (real or imagined) in the MDC, it did not apply the same principles when reporting on ZANU PF or the electoral authorities’ preparations for the Senate.

For example, all of ZBH’s 12 campaign stories on ZANU PF were presented approvingly, while all the 14 stories it carried on administrative issues hardly lent transparency to the setting in which the authorities planned to conduct the polls. Most of the stories were bland official updates on the nomination of candidates by the nomination courts.

The five stories that the government papers published on the administration of the election were styled the same way. So were the three ZANU PF campaign stories they carried.

The private media hardly carried any useful electoral material either. Besides a Studio 7 story (29/10) in which it quoted Electoral Institute of Southern Africa’s Dennis Kadima highlighting the irrelevance of a Senate in Zimbabwe, the rest of the six stories the private media carried merely regurgitated official pronouncements on the electoral preparations.

However, these media did maintain professional coverage of the MDC split. They continued to give a balanced picture of the cracks by fairly projecting the positions of both factions in the 43 stories they carried on the matter, 28 of which were carried by the private papers and 15 by Studio 7. Besides, the private Press carried 10 opinion pieces that usefully examined the crisis threatening the party.

Unlike the government media’s doomsday projections for the MDC, SW Radio Africa (26/10), The Financial Gazette and Studio 7 (27/10) reported that concerted efforts were being made by the feuding parties to patch up their differences and avert the party’s collapse. In fact, Studio 7 and the Zimbabwe Independent (28/10) reported that a meeting of the party’s top six aimed at reaching a compromise ended in a stalemate, although they agreed to stop issuing conflicting statements on the feud.

The government Press (28/10) also covered the meeting’s proceedings.

Studio 7 (25/10) also reported Tsvangirai’s group dismissing the nomination of candidates by its rival faction as unprocedural because they were not "endorsed" by the National Executive Council (NEC) as required under the opposition party’s constitution. However, this was dismissed by the pro-election group, which maintained those nominated represented the party and would be funded from party coffers.

The station quoted Welshman Ncube defending the manner in which his group registered the candidates saying this was because the party’s formal route to select the contestants had been made "impossible" following Tsvangirai’s disregard of the NEC’s endorsement of the polls. The Gazette also reported the Tsvangirai faction as querying the authenticity of the MDC candidates saying some of them "were not party members".

The private media’s critical and balanced coverage of the MDC divisions as exemplified by the private papers was mirrored in their sourcing patterns. See Fig 3.

Fig. 3 Voice distribution in the private Press

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