Back to Index

Political developments
Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe (MMPZ)
Extracted from Weekly Media Update 2007-42
Monday October 22nd - Sunday October 28th 2007
November 01, 2007

The government media only provided a one-dimensional view of the latest events afflicting the country's two biggest political parties in 64 stories they carried on the matter: ZBC (30) and government papers (34). This was reflected in the way they trivialized claims of politically motivated violence levelled against state security agents and ruling party supporters by the Morgan Tsvangirai-led MDC formation. At the same time, they magnified the internal strife in the opposition party while turning a blind eye to similar problems bedevilling ZANU-PF.

Instead of providing an impartial analysis of the MDC's violence claims, they generally amplified government's dismissal of the allegations as baseless, Western-driven and aimed at derailing the SADC-led talks to find a lasting solution to Zimbabwe's political and economic crises.

For example, soon after Home Affairs Minister Kembo Mohadi met an MDC delegation to discuss the claims, The Herald and Chronicle (25/10) passively quoted him pre-empting the opposition's complaints: "They gave me a list of claims and I am going to study the paper. There doesn't seem to be anything of substance; it's all hearsay."How the claims were said to be baseless before they had been studied remained unquestioned. Nor did these media ask why the minister placed the onus on the opposition party to "provide tangible evidence of political violence after the March 11 violent incidents" to his ministry when the police were there.

Instead of investigating Mohadi's claims that the police did not discriminate against the opposition by denying it permission to hold demonstrations while permitting ruling party supporters and war veterans to do the same, Spot FM and ZTV (25/10, 8pm) simply quoted him saying permission "is granted to any organisation if laid down procedures are followed". No reconciliation of this claim was made with reality, especially in view of the way state security agents have disrupted several peaceful marches by civic organisations such as the National Constitutional Assembly and Women of Zimbabwe Arise.

The Herald and Chronicle (27/10) simply reported President Mugabe "scoffing" at the MDC's concerns and challenging the party to substantiate its claims, saying his government had "nothing to hide". Mugabe told the papers: "From out of the blue, his (Tsvangirai's) party is making unsubstantiated reports of . . . violence" and threatening that the government would not "take kindly to 'cry wolf' boys, desperately pretending to be politicians and seeking to embellish their faltering ambitions through falsehoods."

Notably, the official media failed to reconcile Mugabe's own claims that "the police have a right to bash" protestors (The Herald and Chronicle 17/3) following the violent police action that put an end to a court-sanctioned civic rally in Highfield in March with his insistence now that the authorities were not responsible for any violence. Nor did these media remember the brutal assault and torture of dozens of civilians and opposition party leaders while in police custody following that rally, and in the weeks afterwards when dozens more MDC members, accused of various terror charges, were arrested and detained for months on the strength of what a court found to be fabricated evidence.

Otherwise, the official media used an observation by MDC faction leader Arthur Mutambara (The Chronicle, 22/10) that his party had "no capacity to rule" unless they invested in leadership training programmes, and the new rift in the Tsvangirai camp following the controversial dissolution of its women's league executive, to discredit the opposition as hopeless.

The official media avoided discussion on the tensions affecting the ruling party mostly over President Mugabe's candidature in next year's presidential poll. They only passively cited ZANU-PF officials implicitly referring to its existence. For example, ZTV (23/10,8pm) quoted Joseph Msika criticising party officials for using their support for Mugabe to "advance their political interests", but did not attempt to clarify what Msika was referring to. Neither did the station reconcile Msika's observations that Mugabe "had not yet been nominated" (ZTV 23/10, 8pm) with the claim by ZANU PF Politburo member Tendai Savanhu that the party's special congress scheduled for December was meant to "confirm" his candidature "since he was elected at the 2004 ordinary congress" (all stations 27/10, 8pm).

ZTV (23/10, 8pm) similarly suppressed ZANU-PF infighting in Bulawayo. It simply reported that the elections had proceeded with "minor glitches . . . although in some places there were reports of intimidation perpetrated by some elements opposed to the election process". The Herald (27/10) also appeared unconcerned with the internal strife in the ruling party when it passively reported Mugabe urging unity and warning party supporters against what happened in Mashonaland West and Kadoma, without attempting to explain what he was referring to and why it was necessary for him to talk about the importance of unity.

Fig 1 and 2 shows the sourcing patterns of the official media.

Fig 1: Voice distribution on ZBC

Notably, ZBC ignored comments from the opposition and alternative sources.

Fig 2: Voice distribution in the government Press

Although the official dailies' sourcing pattern appears balanced, almost all the MDC voices were either recorded welcoming government's pledge to consider their concerns or selectively used in contexts in which they appeared ridiculous.

Only the private media provided more balanced coverage of the country's political developments in the 72 stories they carried. Of these, 40 appeared in the private electronic media while the rest appeared in the private Press. For example, they gave a more informed view of the meeting between Mohadi and the MDC by examining the circumstances giving rise to the meeting, and also exposed government's hypocrisy in dismissing the claims of violence. The Financial Gazette (25/10), for example, reported that the meeting was a result of SADC demands for government to investigate the MDC claims, while the Zimbabwe Independent (26/10) dismissed the significance of the meeting, arguing that its purpose was "obviously to make it look as if the MDC had no case".

It was in this light that the private media questioned government's political will to stop violence against the opposition, considering that investigations into violence against MDC members such as the late Gift Tandare had yet to be followed up. The private media also kept a close watch on political tensions affecting both parties. While ZimOnline (22/10) cited war veterans leader Jabulani Sibanda, declaring the ruling party would only choose Mugabe's successor "after his death", Studio 7 (25/10) reported unnamed party supporters saying the party's leadership and its candidate for the presidency could only be taken at the party's extraordinary congress.

In fact, The Independent reported that ZANU PF's Politburo had confronted Mugabe over Sibanda's controversial campaign for him to remain party leader. The paper quoted Didymus Mutasa revealing that Sibanda had been "expelled" from the party, contrary to government media reports that claimed he had only been suspended.

The private media's relatively diverse sourcing patterns reflected the critical manner in which they reported the topic. See Fig 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