Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Public media hostility toward opposition continues
Extracted from Media Update 28/2008
Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe (MMPZ)
September 21, 2008

MMPZ condemns the persistent efforts of the government Press, notably The Herald and Sunday Mail, to frustrate the spirit of tolerance and reconciliation that the signing of a power-sharing agreement between ZANU PF and the two formations of the MDC is supposed to epitomize.

Despite a general slackening of public media hostility towards the opposition, especially the Morgan Tsvangirai-led MDC, MMPZ notes with concern that there still exists a coterie of columnists from The Herald and Sunday Mail whose driving agenda seems exclusively anchored in sowing seeds of disharmony among the protagonist parties.

These include Nathaniel Manheru, Caesar Zvayi, Obi Egbuna and Campion Mereki (The Herald), and Tafataona Mahoso (The Sunday Mail). Notably three of these: Mahoso, Manheru (widely suspected to be Press Secretary in the President's office, George Charamba) and Zvayi are already on the West's targeted sanctions list as punishment for their alleged negation of democratic values in the country.

Since the agreement, these columnists have continued to either portray the MDC as an appendage of Western interests bent on undermining the country's sovereignty and reversing land reforms, or as a hopeless movement whose inclusion in the power-sharing deal is undeserved and unwarranted.

The most vituperative of these columns remains those penned by Manheru, who, for the past three consecutive weeks (The Herald [6,13 & 20/9]), have been ridiculing the MDC's inclusion in the planned coalition government. For example, Manheru confessed to being "very angry" with ZANU PF for compromising with the MDC, as "it faced a real risk of coming across as either too anxious for peace or, what is worse, as self-doubting" (The Herald (13/9).
Questioning the logic of the agreement, generally viewed by observers (including President Mugabe) as the best in the circumstances, he remarked: "Why did ZANU PF, itself a liberation movement with a spectacular history, allow such a massive gain by a negative force? The British will seek to use inclusivity in government to further their age-old interest."

The following week, Manheru was at it again, belittling the agreement and scoffing at the MDC's role in the proposed inclusive government while simultaneously inflating the role of ZANU PF and Mugabe.

In addition, he continued to stir public hostility towards the MDC by depicting it as a puppet of the West. For example, he contested that MDC's alleged plans - although never verified - to install "a white colonel (Lionel Dyck) as commander" of the Zimbabwe army "betray an attempt to achieve for the British what they failed to get through the ballot", adding: "Why would MDC want control of ministries that seem calculated for a retributive agenda?"

It was against this background that the private and international media reported MDC spokesman Nelson Chamisa accusing the state-controlled media of publishing hate speech that flew in the face of the "spirit of national engagement and the political settlement" (ZimOnline [23/9]).

The private online news agency cited Chamisa singling out Manheru, whom he accused of using "his column at the weekend to denigrate the opposition and to peddle the 'usual falsehood that the MDC was full of imaginary puppets of the whites'".

While MMPZ is obliged to protect the right of these hate-mongers to express themselves it can only do so if there is a correspondingly free media climate in Zimbabwe that allows for such vitriolic and intolerant views to be effectively countered by alternative opinion - and especially those reflecting the hopes and aspirations of the people of this country. Such an environment however, has yet to see the light of day.

But there can be no doubt that the agreement has ignited the nation-wide hope that Zimbabwe can embark on real social, political and economic reconciliation and recovery that will have no place for the language of hatred and intolerance. This sort of language can only be put in its rightful "lunatic fringe" niche if Zimbabweans are allowed to communicate freely with each other through a free and diverse print and electronic media that affords the nation a real choice about what they read, listen to and view. Only when Zimbabweans have the freedom to choose where they obtain their information will the voice of incitement and authoritarian paranoia wither and fade into a backwater of irrelevance because nobody will need to expose themselves to such bitter and spiteful rhetoric.

Sadly, as Zimbabwe stands today at the entrance to what even The Herald has called a "new era", the government media retain a virtual monopoly on disseminating news and opinion in the country and there can be no hope of any realistic reform while they continue to propagate bigoted dogma that undermines the very agreement their masters have signed up to. This illustrates clearly why MMPZ believes that any new political dispensation must urgently attend to reforming the media environment in Zimbabwe if the country is ever to enjoy any meaningful, progressive and permanent recovery.

This week MMPZ has restructured its analysis of the main news output in the local media by providing a more statistical perspective of stories covered, accompanied a more limited discourse analysis of the content.

The public and private press

The power-sharing deal by ZANU PF and the two MDC formations and other related developments dominated the pages of both the government and private papers during the week. They carried a total of 135 stories: official Press (96) and private papers (39).

Other topical issues featured in these papers included politically motivated violence and the acute water and cash shortages afflicting Zimbabweans.

Fig 1 shows the breakdown in the news coverage of these topics in both the public and private papers.

Fig 1: News distribution in the press

The official papers' extensive coverage of the power-sharing deal was lopsided in favour of ZANU PF and President Mugabe, who they exclusively credited for the successful signing of the deal by presenting them as magnanimous and accommodating.

There was no meaningful analysis on the implications of the power-sharing pact, especially its fragility given the fresh disagreements between ZANU PF and the MDC over the sharing of key ministries in the proposed inclusive government.

The official Press also favoured Mugabe by giving him unmatched front-page pictorial exposure ahead of MDC President Morgan Tsvangirai and leader of the breakaway MDC faction, Arthur Mutambara. For example, during the week The Herald carried eight pictures of the leaders of the negotiating parties on its front pages. Of these, six were of Mugabe while the remainder featured him flanked by Tsvangirai and Mutambara, clearly reinforcing the image of Mugabe as head of state and leader of the nation.

Basically, all the stories the government papers carried on the deal and economy viewed the agreement as the panacea to the country's economic crisis and presented its benefits as almost immediate without coherent back-up. They also carried eight cartoons underpinning this argument and depicted the West as the only threat to such economic renewal.

The official Press continued to use their editorials as purveyors of malicious attacks against perceived opponents. While they noticeably shied away from carrying any direct assaults on the MDC and Tsvangirai, they attacked their alleged masters, the West, for their "cautious" reception of the deal, including the foreign media and NGOs, who they accused of pursuing an "illegal regime change agenda" in the country.

In this light, they gave prominence to comments that gave a favourable impression of the pact while suppressing critical voices on the matter from mostly civic society and the international community. Fig 2 shows the Press' sourcing patterns in the coverage of the deal story.

Fig 2: Voice distribution in the Press

The government papers carried four stories that attempted to give a critical examination of the agreement. In one of these, The Herald (20/9) columnist, Nathaniel Manheru, provided a cynical yet informative analysis of the deal. However, the columnist seemed preoccupied with highlighting what the MDC had conceded to ZANU PF without giving corresponding information on what the ruling party had ceded to the opposition party in the compromise deal.

More qualitative assessment of the subject only appeared in the private Press, which gave expression to a variety of alternative comments either suppressed or censored by the government papers.

The papers cited these voices generally expressing scepticism on the soundness of the deal and its successful implementation, considering Mugabe's alleged reluctance to share power with the opposition.

Both the public and private papers gave scant attention to the cash and water crises in the country.

The government Press restricted their coverage of the water crisis to either announcing the Zimbabwe National Water Authority's self-confessed incapacity to provide treated drinking water to Harare or highlighted the residents complaints. Notably, half of the critical voices recorded in the public Press came from the public's displeasure with Zinwa's failure to provide them with safe drinking water.

No attempt was made to investigate the catastrophic impact of such a development in view of the cholera outbreak in Chitungwiza.

The private Press inexplicably ignored the matter.

Except for the Chronicle (20/9) and Sunday News (21/9), the rest of the government papers celebrated the Reserve Bank's introduction of the $1 000 note and the increase in the daily withdrawal amount to the same value, without subjecting it to any sensible analysis (The Herald and Chronicle [17/9). More critical assessment of the move appeared in the private Press.

The government Press censored the violent skirmishes between ZANU PF and MDC supporters that broke out at the Rainbow Towers during the signing ceremony of the power-sharing agreement, reported in the special edition of the Zimbabwe Independent (16/9), which was published early in the week to cover the talks.

The Herald (19/9) only carried a general announcement by police chief spokesperson Wayne Bvudzijena promising to investigate all "reported" cases of political violence.

ZBC and private radio stations

Although ZBC devoted 94 stories to Zimbabwe's political developments and persisting economic problems, these did not translate into any incisive coverage of the issues. Only the privately owned radio stations, Studio 7 & SW Radio Africa, provided meaningful coverage of these matters in 39 stories.

Fig 1 shows the news breakdown in their coverage of these topics in the public and electronic media.

Fig 1: Number of stories on ZBC and private radio stations

ZBC concealed problems threatening to derail the ZANU PF/MDC power-sharing agreement signed two weeks ago over the allocation of Cabinet ministries. All their reports on the matter papered over the problem with reports portraying the pact favourably and as a tonic for the country's worsening economic situation without elaboration.
ZBC also emphasized excerpts of the deal that favoured ZANU PF policies while simultaneously depicting the ruling party as in full control of developments. For instance, ZTV (17/9 7am) reported the parties as having "pledged to work in unison to end sanctions" while its evening bulletin said the parties "recognised" that the "colonial racist land ownership patterns was not sustainable and was against national interests, equity and justice..."

The broadcaster masked the extent of the economic crisis - as evidenced by escalating prices, severe shortages of goods and services and the recent cholera outbreak - by presenting the government as being in control of the situation. No proof of this was provided. In contrast, the private radio stations revealed the problems affecting the power-sharing agreement, including President Mugabe's alleged refusal to cede some key ministries to the opposition in the envisaged national unity government.

They also recorded a cross section of Zimbabweans, including civil society, complaining about their exclusion from the process. SW Radio Africa (16/9), for example, quoted NANGO, a coalition of civic society organisations, describing their exclusion as "ridiculous" while ZCTU Secretary-General Wellington Chibhebhe told Studio 7 (15/9) that the deal "concentrated on power instead of democracy".

In other reports, the private radio stations highlighted symptoms of Zimbabwe's economic deterioration, arguing that the situation was likely to worsen unless the proposed government adopted policies acceptable to the international community. Like ZBC, they failed to do justice to persisting water and cash shortages afflicting Zimbabweans by underreporting these issues.

Fig 2 illustrates the sourcing patterns on the national broadcaster and the private radio stations.

Fig 2: Voice distribution on ZBC and private radio stations

Although ZBC reports appeared to be widely sourced, most of the voices quoted passively endorsed and presented the agreement as a solution to the country's crisis without any critical assessment. Similarly, sources quoted to comment on economic and health issues were fashioned in the same way.

In contrast, the private radio stations sourcing patterns were more balanced, reflecting diverse views.

Online publications

The private online media continued to provide critical updates of the ZANU PF/MDC power-sharing pact, highlighting its merits and shortcomings. They carried 52 reports on the subject and other related matter.

Fig 3 shows the breakdown in the news coverage of the topic in the private online media.

Fig 3: Number of stories in online news agencies

The online news agencies also recorded a variety of Zimbabweans and the international community "cautiously" welcoming the deal. These doubted ZANU PF's commitment to the agreement, citing its alleged refusal to cede key cabinet posts to the MDC and the ongoing violence against suspected opposition supporters. They carried two incidents of violence, including alleged attacks on opposition supporters in Mbare by the ruling party's Chipangano vigilante gang (SW Radio Africa 19/9).

The online agencies also published civil society organizations complaining about their exclusion from the process. However, like the national broadcaster, the online media viewed the pact as a panacea to the country's e economic problems, citing promises by some sections of the international community, including multilateral financial institutions, like the IMF and African Development Bank, to support Zimbabwe's economic revival.

These media recorded several indicators of economic decline, including the cash crunch and highlighted their devastating impact on the majority of Zimbabweans. It was against this background that, ZimDaily (18/9) reported a human rights watchdog, Restoration of Human Rights Organization, as planning to sue RBZ Governor Gideon Gono for implementing "bad policies that (have) severely affected the people", citing "his totally unreasonable cash withdrawal limits".

Fig 4 illustrates the sourcing patterns in the online publications.

Fig 4: Voice distribution by online news agencies

The online media's sourcing patterns were relatively balanced as reflected by their attempt to seek comment from differing views. Among these was the ZCTU, which reportedly "rejected" the power-sharing deal on the grounds that "it did not reflect the will of the people as expressed on March 29".

*Favourable sources: These approved of and endorsed the deal without any reservations
*Critical voices: These evaluated the deal and highlighted some of its shortcomings
*Neutral sources: These examined the merits of the deal and maintained a non-commited tone

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