Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Business crackdown
Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe (MMPZ)
Extracted from Weekly Media Update 2007-26
Monday July 2nd 2007 - Sunday July 8th 2007
July 12, 2007

THE government media continued to narrowly blame business for the country's economic problems underscored by galloping cost of living to justify government crackdown on the sector. All their 145 stories on the topic (ZBC [95] and official Press [49]) projected this slant. Like the previous week, none of the reports remotely linked the rising cost of living to government's failed policies. Neither did they assess the economic cost of the clampdown, nor question the authorities' retrospective legislation of the purge, only gazetted more than a week after its launch (The Herald and Chronicle 7/7).

Otherwise, the official media simply restricted themselves to amplifying official reasons for ordering industry to halve prices of their goods and services.

It was against this background that ZBC (2/7, 1pm & 8pm) and the official dailies (3/7) passively reported Vice President Joseph Msika reiterating last week's threats by President Mugabe to seize defiant businesses saying those that did not comply with government directive were "sell-outs, renegades and money mongers" who should "either close shop or face the consequences". He also echoed government's conspiracies that the price hikes were "subversive" and "politically motivated".

Instead of establishing the veracity of these claims, the official media simply allowed ruling party officials such as Elliot Manyika and Nathan Shamuyarira; the police and pro-government commentators like Godwills Masimirembwa, Nathaniel Manheru and Tafataona Mahoso to reinforce the allegations.

ZTV (5/7, 8pm), The Herald and Chronicle (6/7), for example, passively reported Shamuyarira claiming that the "rampant increases in prices of goods and services will no longer be used as a tool for regime change as some businesspersons were anticipating". Mugabe restated his government position at the weekend, vowing that "Britain and her allies won't succeed in toppling Zanu-PF by attacking the economy" and deriding observations that the crackdown was "illegal" (ZBC 6&7/7 main bulletins and The Herald 7/7). Without discussing the grounds under which the government action was deemed "illegal", these media only emphasised Mugabe's opinion on the matter. They quoted him: " . . . it's illegal vanhu vachifa nenzara (it's illegal when people are dying from hunger)? . . . Unenge uchitaura palaw ipi iyoyo kana vanhu vachifa (which law are you saying it's illegal when people are starving to death)?" No attempt was made to analyse the underlying implications of these statements, which clearly exposed government's disregard for the rule of law.

It was in this light that ZTV (6/7, 8pm) avoided asking police spokesman Oliver Mandipaka which law the police had used to arrest businesses that "defied government's order to reduce prices" before the gazetting of the Control of Goods (Price Control) (Amendment) Order. Such professional dishonesty saw Radio Zimbabwe and ZTV (3/7, 6am & 8pm) allow Manyika to present the crackdown as having successfully "brought about stabilisation of prices" without reconciling his claims with the ensuing crippling commodity shortages. In fact, ZTV & Spot FM (4/7, evening bulletins) and Radio Zimbabwe (5/7, 6am) merely mentioned the shortages in the context of the police blitz on businesses that were allegedly "hoarding" or "hiding" commodities in their warehouses to create scarcities. No comment was sought from the alleged culprits. Consequently, there was no clarity on whether the 'discovered' commodities had been indeed hidden or were part of business' stocks.

The official media's lopsided coverage of the topic further manifested itself in the government media avoiding balancing official claims with alternative comment as shown in Figs. 1 and 2.

Fig. 1 Voice Distribution in government voices

Fig. 2 Voice distribution on ZBC

For instance, all those outside government were mainly quoted in the context of the price cuts. The private media's 62 stories on the subject (private Press [34] and private electronic media [28]) continued to dismiss the clampdown as an unwise move that would further cripple industry and cause widespread commodity shortages and job losses. They also questioned government's allegations that business was raising prices to destabilise government.

The Financial Gazette (5/7), for example, noted that the regime change "mantra and tactic has lost all meaning" as government uses it "non-stop to whip those opposed to some of its ruinous economic decisions into line". Earlier, SW Radio Africa (2/7) highlighted the huge losses business had incurred following the crackdown noting that Jaggers, for instance, had lost about Z$500 million on orange juice alone since the forced price reductions.

While the official media suppressed business' concerns over the matter, New Zimbabwe.com (4/7) quoted Zimbabwe National Chamber of Commerce President Marah Hativagone decrying the development and expressing hope that "government will see sense and revert to normal business practices." Hotelier Shingi Munyeza agreed (Studio 7 5/7), noting that the hotel industry "will collapse if the pricing chaos continues." And contrary to the impression created by the official media that businesses were freely complying with government directive, the private media exposed human rights violations perpetrated by government's crack price control teams deployed to enforce the order.

The private media's critical coverage of the subject was illustrated by their attempts to balance the official perspective with comments from those outside government. See Figs. 3 and 4.

Fig 3 Voice distribution in the private electronic media

Fig 4 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