Back to Index

The Senate elections
Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe (MMPZ)
Extracted from Weekly Media Update 2005-45
Monday November 21^st 2005 – Monday November 27^th 2005

THE just-ended Senate elections dominated Zimbabwe’s media during the week. The Print media carried 90 stories on the matter, 68 of which appeared in the government Press, 22 in the private papers. ZBH carried 145 stories, while private radio stations had 30 (Studio 7 [22] and SW Radio Africa [8]).

As has become the norm during an election, the government media abdicated their public mandate and slavishly campaigned for the ruling party at the expense of other contesting parties and independent candidates. For example, of the 43 campaign stories the government Press carried, 37 (86%) were positive projections of ZANU PF campaign activities, while only six were on the MDC, mostly only in the context of the party’s internal wrangles. Campaign activities of other opposition parties and independent candidates were ignored.

ZBH also gave more coverage to ZANU PF thereby violating Section 2 (1) of the Broadcasting Services Act, which directs it to give "reasonable and equal opportunities for the broadcasting of election matter to all parties contesting the elections".

Of the 76 campaign reports the broadcaster carried, 67 (88%) were on ZANU PF, while seven (9%) were on the MDC. The Multiracial Open Party (MOP) and the Zimbabwe Youth Alliance (ZIYA) were covered once each.

The government broadcaster’s open support for the ruling party was clearly illustrated by the time ZTV allocated to campaigns in its main bulletins. Out of 72 minutes and 25 seconds the station allocated to campaigns, 68 minutes and 10 seconds (94%) were devoted to ZANU PF, while three minutes and five seconds (4%) were allocated to the MDC. ZIYA and MOP shared the remaining minute.

Almost all reports on the opposition parties mainly quoted candidates expressing their views on the electoral process and not promoting their manifestos. The excessive coverage of the ruling party did not amount to critical examination of the party’s policies.

The government media sheepishly rehashed ZANU PF officials’ campaign speeches, which were notable more for their attacks on the MDC and Britain than an explanation about how the Senate will help to address the country’s economic problems.

For example, ZTV (22/11, 8pm) passively quoted President Mugabe amplifying MDC MP Job Sikhala’s crude attack on his leader Morgan Tsvangirai, whom he described as a "a goblin" that "feasted on human flesh", while addressing a ZANU PF rally in Masvingo. Vice-President Joseph Msika was also quoted in the same bulletin denigrating the opposition party as a "group of sponsored sellouts."

The Herald and Chronicle (22/11) also magnified these absurd and unsubstantiated insults.

In fact, ZANU PF exploited the split within the MDC throughout the week, vilifying Tsvangirai and the anti-Senate faction. The Herald (24/11), for example, unquestioningly quoted Mugabe using allegations levelled against Tsvangirai by members of the pro-Senate MDC faction to insult the opposition leader, describing him as an undemocratic, corrupt and power hungry "dung beetle".

The government media’s reluctance to go beyond ZANU PF rhetoric resulted in ZTV (22/11, 8pm) and The Herald (22/11) failing to investigate fissures in the ruling party as hinted by Msika’s allegations that some unnamed senior party officials who were suspended over the Tsholotsho Declaration last year were "sponsoring" independent candidates in Masvingo. (Only The Financial Gazette gave a clearer picture on the matter).

The Herald and ZTV (22/11, 8pm) did nothing to question whether the doling out of hundreds of computers in Manicaland and Midlands provinces – a development that has become characteristic of Mugabe’s campaigns – amounted to vote-buying.

The passive extent of these media’s coverage of the election was also evident in the 51 stories (government Press [8] and ZBH [43]) they carried on administrative issues. All the reports merely regurgitated official statements on the authorities’ preparations for the poll without raising critical questions.

For example, while ZBH (24/11, 8pm) quoted Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) chairman George Chiweshe expressing ZEC’s readiness for the election, it did not question whether the 4,541 polling stations were adequate.

The next day The Herald and Chronicle carried similar reports and reported that 72 observers had been accredited, 60 of which were local and 12 foreign. These figures contradicted those carried by ZTV (25/11, 7am), which reported that 72 local observers, 22 international ones and 27 from SADC diplomatic missions had been accredited. None of these media questioned whether these few observers could adequately cover the polling stations.

Neither did the official Press question why ZEC had only publicised the location of polling stations on the same day the electorate went to the polls. Notably, throughout the week the commission only placed adverts on the accreditation of journalists and observers and a statement by the multi-party liaison committee pledging to uphold the country’s electoral laws.

The uncritical manner in which the government media handled the subject was reflected in their reliance on the ruling party and electoral officials. See Figs 1 and 2.

Fig 1 Voice distribution in the government Press

Fig 2 Voice distribution on ZBH

Most of the MDC sources were quoted in the context of the party’s squabbles while other parties, the police and ordinary people were mainly quoted hailing the country’s electoral process.

Only the private media attempted to critically examine the electoral process in some of the 14 stories (Studio 7 [10] and the private Press [4]) they carried. For instance, they bemoaned the lack of voter education, late deployment of observers and the secrecy surrounding the criteria used to demarcate constituency boundaries. The Zimbabwe Independent and Studio 7 (25/11), for example, quoted Zimbabwe Election Support Network (ZESN) chairman Reginald Matchaba-Hove questioning the constituency boundaries. He told the Independent that the delineation of constituencies remained a "mystery", adding that "overall" they were "demarcated (in such a way) that were the electorate to vote the same way on November 26 as it did on March 31, the MDC would not win any senatorial seats even in those provinces where it won some seats in March 2005".

Studio 7 (23/11) also quoted Electoral Institute of Southern Africa director Dennis Kadhima deploring the number of observers and their late deployment, saying those accredited were insufficient "to collect information and get a fair sense" of the situation "on the ground", adding that no "serious observer mission can be deployed at this late stage".

Apart from trying to expose administrative weaknesses, the private media carried 18 campaign stories (Studio 7 [12] and private papers [6]). Nine of the stories were on the MDC, while eight were on ZANU PF. One was on ZAPU’s reasons for not contesting the election. The other contestants were ignored. SW Radio Africa mainly focussed on the MDC’s internal strife in its stories on the Senate elections.

The private media’s critical approach was reflected by their attempts to seek independent comments on the campaigns and the electoral process as shown in Figs 3 and 4.

Fig 3 Voice distribution in the private Press

Fig 4 Voice distribution on Studio 7

Meanwhile, both private and government media agreed that the election was marred by voter apathy (27/11), as The Financial Gazette (24/11), the Independent and Studio 7, (25/11) had predicted. However, they offered different reasons for this.

While The Sunday Mail and The Sunday Mirror (27/11) attributed voter apathy to inadequate voter education on the relevance of the Senate, The Standard’s headline story, Voters rebuff Mugabe, viewed the low voter turnout as a public protest against the re-introduction of the Senate and a result of Tsvangirai’s campaign against the polls.

Except for Studio 7 (28/11), none of the media gave figures on the total votes cast.

The station quoted ZESN saying only 20% of the registered voters had cast their ballots. The Herald (28/11) only tabulated the results without discussing what fraction of the 3,2 million voters the paper (25/11) announced were eligible to vote represented the total ballots.

Typically, when it emerged that ZANU PF had won - as predicted by the media - official dailies (28/11) and ZBH (28/11, 8pm) celebrated the "landslide victory" and simplistically projected it as signifying the growing popularity of the ruling party.

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