Back to Index

News selection, censorship and under-coverage
Media Monitoring Project of Zimbabwe (MMPZ)
Weekly Media Update 2006-39
Monday September 25th 2006 - Sunday October 1st 2006

THE differences in the manner the government media and the private media handle important issues affecting citizens’ lives was illustrated by their coverage of the forthcoming elections, human rights abuses and the "succession" issue.

Whereas the government media reported these issues through the official lens or completely censored them (which exposed the authorities’ determination to subvert democratic processes), the private media generally subjected them to fair examination.

Consequently, they did not condemn his remarks as an indication of the authorities’ blatant disregard for civil liberties enshrined in the constitution and various international conventions to which Zimbabwe is signatory.

For example, ZTV, Spot FM and Radio Zimbabwe (25/9, 8pm) passively quoted Mugabe justifying the assaults saying the police were doing "their job to ensure peace and order in the country", adding that "anyone who resists police orders" would be "dealt with forcefully". He reiterated these crude threats at the end of the week saying "government won’t stand idle" but would "act decisively against any threats to law and order", claiming that ZCTU demonstrations were "illegal" and a challenge to "the very principle of the rule of law", ZTV (29/9, 6pm).

These statements were allowed to pass without scrutiny.

Likewise, the official papers simply allowed Mugabe to defend the police brutality by twisting the motive of the ZCTU protest. The Herald and Chronicle (25/9), for instance, neither provided evidence establishing the link between the ZCTU’s protest with the alleged US/Britain "regime change" agenda, nor demonstrated how the union leaders wanted "to become a law unto themselves". Also, no attempt was made to question Mugabe’s use of inflammatory and insulting language in defending the police violence and denigrating the union leaders, especially secretary-general Wellington Chibebe.

The Herald and Chronicle (26/9) just cited him chiding the ZCTU saying: "(They) think that they can organize demonstrations and look for potbellied people like Chibebe to demonstrate…Musatyisidzirwe nanaChibebe vane mazitumbu; rizere mweya hamuna zvirimo"(don’t be intimidated by Chibebe with his potbelly: it contains nothing but air).

It was against this background that the government papers avoided interpreting two of the three incidents of rights violations they carried in light of continued state sanctioned rights abuses. Instead, The Herald and Chronicle (26/9) merely treated the arrest of 17 MDC officials for holding an "illegal" meeting in Kariba as normal and criminalized the gathering by linking it to an attempt by the "National Constitutional Assembly to hold an illegal demonstration in Harare" that had been "thwarted" by the police. The agenda of the meeting remained undisclosed.

This contrasted with the front-page publicity The Sunday Mail (1/10) accorded to the alleged attack on a University of Zimbabwe ZANU PF political activist by suspected MDC supporters. The report was sensational, single-sourced and sought to depict the opposition, especially the Tsvangirai-led MDC, as violent.

Only the private media (except the Mirror stable, which adopted the government media slant) challenged Mugabe over his remarks. Not only did they view his comments as an illustration of government’s complicity in human rights abuses, they also publicised the international community’s indignant reaction to Mugabe’s remarks. Those quoted expressing dismay included the UN, the International Bar Association (IBA) and international trade unions. Studio 7 (27/9, the Gazette (28/9) and the Zimbabwe Independent, for example, quoted IBA executive director Mark Ellis saying Mugabe’s statements "added weight to evidence that torture and other serious violations of international law" were "sanctioned at the highest level in Zimbabwe".

In addition, the private media carried several stories on human rights violations and recorded eight incidents of abuses. They included the press-ganging of vendors and pushcart operators to attend Mugabe’s homecoming at Harare International Airport, the alleged torturing to death of a soldier by military police, and the arrest and assault of opposition members and civic activists.

The government media ignored most of these cases. They also censored revelations that several civic groups had boycotted a UNDP-brokered conference on the proposed establishment of a human rights commission in protest against government repression (the Gazette and Independent).

Although the figures gave the impression that the media significantly covered the matter, there was hardly any investigation into the mechanics governing the elections. As a result, the electorate was left no wiser on the state of the voters’ rolls, the number of polling stations and their location, ward and constituency boundaries and identification particulars required for voting. Neither was there any effort to establish how many observers would be accredited for the polls.

Otherwise, the government media seemed only interested in promoting ZANU PF.

For example, out of the 12 campaign stories ZBH carried, eight (67%) were solely on ZANU PF campaigns, while the remaining four (33%) were on the ruling party and the Arthur Mutambara-led MDC. ZBH also carried 12 other reports in which ZANU PF officials and senior civil servants were quoted campaigning for the ruling party.

None were on the Morgan Tsvangirai-led MDC.

In fact, the only time that Tsvangirai’s faction was mentioned was when President Mugabe derided its leader as a "stooge" of British Prime Minister Tony Blair during a ZANU PF rally in Mashonaland Central (ZTV, 30/9, 8pm).

The official Press adopted a similar trend. For instance, of the eight stories the official papers carried on elections, five were positive coverage of the ruling party campaigns. Only one story sought the views of all the contesting parties on the conduct of the election (The Herald 26/9). Still, the story did not investigate concerns by both factions of the MDC that the electoral process was biased against them, citing cases in which their candidates were denied registration resulting in the ruling party fielding about 400 candidates unopposed. Rather, the following day The Herald (27/9) passively reported Jerry Gotora of the newly formed Zimbabwe Local Government Association (ZILGA) saying he "was pleased" with the results of the nomination courts, which he said, "confirmed the existence of democracy in Zimbabwe".

But while the government media gave ample space to the ruling party, they barely examined the party’s campaign messages and activities. It was against this background that ZBH simply reported Mugabe’s computer handouts in Mashonaland Central (ZTV, 30/9, 8pm) – ahead of the polls – as normal without viewing them as tantamount to vote-buying.

It was only the private media that tried to expose the authorities’ unorthodox means to tilt the scales in ZANU PF’s favour. They reported the MDC accusing the ruling party of setting stringent requirements for the nomination of candidates to disqualify its contestants. The Financial Gazette’s story (28/9), We were robbed: MDC factions, is an example. It quoted the opposition claiming that besides the "prohibitive cost" of registering and "difficulties…in getting clearance certificates from the police", their candidates were also heavily fined for failing to seek timely council clearance to participate in the polls "even though there was no legal provision for such fines".

It also cited the MDC accusing suspected ZANU PF youths in Bindura of having allegedly closed Goldprint, the main photographic service in the town, thereby "thwarting" the nomination of hundreds of prospective candidates who did not have photographs.

Studio 7 (26/9) also reported the opposition highlighting similar bureaucratic impediments. However, the reports simply relied on the opposition and lacked independent verification. Moreover, there was no attempt to investigate the reasons behind ZANU PF’s failure to field candidates in at least seven wards, where the opposition won unopposed.

Apart from exposing electoral controversies, the Gazette recorded two incidents of politically motivated violence against MDC activists by suspected ZANU PF supporters.

Similarly, the private electronic media carried eight stories on political violence, harassment and arrests of MDC candidates and activists ahead of the elections.

Again, the reports were only based on the opposition’s allegations and lacked official corroboration.

The official media simply allowed his denial to pass without establishing what he had said exactly, or relating his statements to revelations by the Independent last year linking the succession squabbles in the ruling party to the planned postponement of the presidential poll.

Instead, they either reported Mugabe urging aspirants to "desist from fighting over the succession issue" and freely "throw their hats into the ring", or cited other senior party officials discouraging such debate saying: "No sun rises while another exists" (The Manica Post 29/1 and The Sunday Mail and Sunday News 1/10).

ZTV and Spot FM (30/9, 8pm) carried similar reports.

However, the private electronic media did not display such professional dereliction in the three stories they carried on the subject. They discussed the possible reasons behind the planned constitutional amendment and its implications on the country’s governance.

The online agency, Zimdaily (27/9), for example, quoted an unnamed ZANU PF official claiming that the amendment was meant to give Mugabe more time "to identify and nurture a successor, something that cannot be done in a year given the fissures that have developed in ZANU PF…"

Other unnamed ruling party officials echoed similar views on Studio7 and New Zimbabwe.com (28/9).

The private Press’ five stories on the subject largely exposed the contradictions in the succession debate. For example, while the Gazette and the Independent quoted Shamuyarira admitting that the succession debate was "definitely on", they reported others like Vice-President Joseph Msika suggesting that the leadership was not yet ready for the debate, saying the matter was a "petty issue" that was "unacceptable".

This appeared to be confirmed by The Sunday Mirror (1/10), which quoted party national chairman John Nkomo claiming that the succession issue "would only arise at the 2009 congress therefore debate at the moment is academic".

The lopsided manner in which the government media handled the three topics was reflected by their over-dependence on official and ruling party voices at the expense of alternative ones as shown in Figs 1 and 2.

Fig 1 Voice distribution on ZBH

Fig 2 Voice distribution in the government Press

In contrast, the private media’s sourcing appeared balanced as shown by the voice distribution in the private papers (see Fig 3)

Fig 3 Voice distribution in private papers

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