Does the ZBC also listen?

Interactivity between the communicators and the audiences is a very welcome development and is the in thing especially between the mass media and their audiences in this day and age of media convergence.

This has the advantage of providing the necessary feedback the communicators need if they will not feel removed from the audiences. Musical programmes aired through the national broadcaster from time to time invite and receive the audiences’ opinions on the programmes. Sometimes listeners vote for certain musical pieces ratings on the top 40 or 20 are received and aired.

From this feedback, the broadcaster gets a confirmation that out there, there are some people listening to their programmes. On the other hand, the viewers/listeners feel that their participation on the radio or television programmes are taken into consideration.

However, I have wondered whether the presenters on ZBC TV newsnet are at all serious about their call for comments from news viewers. Presenters go to the extent of supplying telephone numbers, fax numbers and the e-mail address. Of course the presentation of this advert has been carefully done – the text of the telephone and fax numbers as well as the e-mail address being dramatically articulated in keeping with the screening of the figures or letters on the screen.

But if there are any people responding to the invitation for comments “to these and other stories” we are yet to hear of such views from audiences being reported on. Is it because there are no people sending their views/comments on news items? One can only wonder. If there are none why should not the invitation be either stopped altogether, or at least changed as it seems not to have any effect. If people have indeed sent in comments what happens to those comments.

By Elikana Shoko

Big Brother says ICU.

The Interception of Communications Bill (ICB) has now sailed through Zimbabwe's House of Assembly, going to the upper house will just be a formality reports Newzimbabwe.com. (see link):

http://www.newzimbabwe.com/pages/email19.16541.html.

The only hope left is that the good President will take his time to append his signature to it like he did with the NGO Bill. Meanwhile, we can continue with our harmless childish pranks on the President or even sellout to the country's ditractors through the Internet or the cellphone. Very soon the thought police will catch up with all thought criminals like Talkmedia and others in Zimbabwe.

What will be the possible implications of this new law on those of us who live by peddling juicy tit-bits on the unfolding tragedy and its main protagonists in Zimbabwe?

1, Imagine how we shall all miss the unsavoury SMSs cartooning our hitherto good natured President through our cellphones.

2, How we shall all be relieved to have no more silly little jokes lampooning His Excellency, spamming our e-mail boxes.

3, Rumour mongers bent on tarnishing the image of our beloved country, its leaders and its sacrosanct institutions by pretending they were privy to juicy details of scandals will be no longer at ease to pass on their blatant lies to journalists via SMSs, or e-mails since no journalists can guarantee their anonymity anymore.

4, Our media shall be sanitised of all unpatriotic confabs.

5, Critical blogsites like Talkmedia will have to tone down criticism especially if directed to government policies.

Isn't that double plus good in Orwellian Newspeak terms?

By the Oracle.

Was Ankomah doing it for the money?

The truth is not for consumption by those of a weak nervous disposition, otherwise people wouldn’t get paid to write it. That is not what journalism schools are there for, to train people to write it. The truth can be found anywhere else but in the news. Just as physicians live by the hypocritic oath so also journalism’s professional ethic enjoins them to avoid the truth like the plague. Just musing.

It is for this reason that anybody who reads the May edition of the New African magazine’s reporting of the March 11 civil disturbances in Zimbabwe should do so with extreme caution.

Running across the first two pages of the supplement is a three word banner headline “Zimbabwe The Truth” writ large and in bold typeface suggesting to the reader that what they are about to read in the next 73 pages is nothing but the truth about what is going on in a country so deep in political and economic turmoil. Two portrait pictures one of Mr Morgan Tsvangirai leader of the opposition party, Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), and the other of a female police officer both victims of the low keyed political conflict in the country. the one with a wounded scalp, the other with a scalded face, face each other across the page as if to accentuate the unbridgeable divide that separates the political parties they represent, the MDC and Zanu PF respectively.

The headline Ankomah pens for his intro to the supplement “When truth takes a holiday” immediately puts one on their guard never mind the assurances and protestations made about how this collection of stories is going to be different. The appellation ‘Sponsored Supplement’ that marks each of the 26 odd stories on Zimbabwe further reinforces the premonition that truth might be as absent from this collection as it is alleged to have been from the discredited reports by western media.

The reader becomes acutely aware that Baffour Ankomah, the magazine’s editor, was doing it for the money. What the reader has in front of him is not the simple truth but a ‘sponsored version of it’. The point Ankomah’s constructed truth tries to make, that western media has misrepresented the reality on the ground in Zimbabwe is itself much less convincing given the official sources he relies on.

A case in point is the interview with Mr Godwin Matanga the Deputy Police Commissioner whose rationalization of his charges' brutal assault on Mr Tsvangirai insults the reader’s intelligence. How a single man, unarmed, could possibly have attempted to overrun a whole police camp, ends up with a cracked scull without him inflicting a scratch on any policeman boggles the mind.

The truth probably lies in all that hasn’t been said or written about the Zimbabwean situation in general and the events of 11 March in particular. Is the truth so disquieting that no journalist dares write about it and no newspaper publish it?

One is reminded of John Pilger's remark that real truth is always subversive, that truth comes from the ground up, almost never from the top down.

How do Ankomah’s stories on Zimbabwe's disturbances of March 11 measure up to this standard of truthfulness?

By the Oracle

Opinion: Zimbabwe government paranoid about private press

Government’s hard line stance against the private media smacks of paranoia. This unfortunate development, on close examination is a result of government’s excessive desire to control and influence the formulation of opinion. The private media on the other hand has responded by attacking government whenever they get the chance.

The privately owned media are accused of being western funded and the government believes that they are being used by the west to champion a regime change agenda in the country. This seems to be a lame excuse used by authorities to persecute the private media. The media are supposed to report truthfully and it is unfortunate that our government views alternative views as views of its enemy. Alternative views are treated with suspicion even if they are constructive.

The independent media has not helped either, some of the articles, especially on Internet based publications like Zimdaily and NewZimbabwe have probably given the government some reason to be paranoid and heavy handed. A case in point is a story published on Zimdaily a few weeks ago that dwelt on President Mugabe’s manhood. Although the editors defended the story arguing that the issue was of public interest the story seemed to be inspired more by malice and not by a genuine need to inform.

Furthermore, there seems to be a relentless attack on government by the private media. Snap surveys of most of the ‘independent’ papers show that most of the stories are blatantly anti-government. Whether this is so because government always fails or the private media has an ulterior motive is not clear. This polarization where we have pro government and anti-government media has all but sealed the fate of objectivity within our media.

There is also a situation where the media are now paying more and more attention to political issues and neglecting all other issues that maybe of equal if not of more importance to their audiences. This can be attributed to the prevailing situation where politics has penetrated all spheres of our social life. Instead of taking a different route to government, the private media also seem to have developed a habit of reporting mostly politics albeit with a biased tone.

The hostile legislation in the form of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (2002) was the beginning of a nasty crusade against press freedom in the country. This restrictive piece of legislation underlined government’s suspicion and paranoia against the private media. Shortly after AIPPA was passed into law, The Daily News and The Daily News on Sunday were closed down and other publications like The Tribune have been closed down mostly because they were perceived to be too critical of government.

The coming of AIPPA also brought the criminalization of journalism as well as sustained government brutality against journalists in the private media. Government has shown little or no remorse over these alarming levels of intolerance and recently the Minister of State Security Cde Didymus Mutasa was quoted in The Standard as saying that he wished that these pieces of legislation would be there forever. This arrogance from a government official just goes to show how low our leaders have stooped in their quest to restrict media freedom.

Access to public information is also restricted especially to the private media. Most government officials refuse to speak to journalists perceived to be working for the “opposition” press and this leaves the private media with no sources with which they can verify facts. This issue has led to disenchantment within the private media and it has further fueled the already rife suspicion of mismanagement on the part of government.

The detention and torture of journalists by state security agents is another pointer towards government’s intolerance. It has contributed to the frosty relations between the government and the private media. Journalists are not allowed to carry out their work freely unless they subscribe to government’s populist ideology.Consequently,freedom of expression is curtailed and there is a persistent threat of violence against journalists who portray views perceived to be detrimental to government policy. The inhuman treatment of media practitioners by the government is not doing any good to the government whose international human rights record is, to say the least, unimpressive.

Another blatant display of paranoia by the government is its desire to influence and control media training institutions. Recently, there was an unconfimed story in The Independent that alleged that prospective students in The School of Journalism and Mass Communication at the Harare Polytechnic needed to have undergone National Service Training. Due to the fact that national service training centres are said to be indoctrination bases, this initiative shows government’s desire to produce a journalist cddre devoid of objectivity.

Whether it is government paranoia or the private media’s recklessness that has led to the polarization of our media, one thing is certain. We need coorperation from both parties to build a vibrant and objective media whose agenda is to enhance the well being of the nation. There is an urgent need for the media to rise above trivial sectoral interests in order to play a truly informative role.

By Innocent Yekeye,

Bsc Honours in Media and Society Studies Level 2.2

Western embassies snub MSU World Press Freedom Day commemmorations

The United States Ambassador to Zimbabwe Dr Christopher Dell and his British counterpart Dr Andrew Pocock failed to show up at a belated World Press Freedom Day function organised by Midlands State University’s Media Department, last week Thursday.

The two had been invited to take part in a five-panel presentation on the role the media has played in shaping relations between Zimbabwe and the two western nations. Invited to speak on the same subject were the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Information Mr George Charamba, the CEO of the Media and Information Commission Dr Tafataona Mahoso and Mr Bornwell Chakaodza, former editor of The Standard.

Of the five invited guests only Mr Charamba and Dr Mahoso turned up for the function which kicked off almost an hour later than the scheduled time as the hosts were kept waiting for the arrival of the full panel of guest speakers who had all confirmed they were coming.

It ended up being a one sided debate as both the Permsec and MIC CEO presented government’s view on the topic. Presentations by the two ambassadors and from Mr Chakaodza representing civil society were expected to give alternative views helping to enrich the debate. But it was not to be.

No apologies or explanations were given for this last minute change of heart and cancellation and it left the gathered students wondering whether this was a sign that even those who were wont to preach the virtues of plurality of views and tolerance of dissenting opinions were after all not so tolerant themselves in practice.

Probably they felt that they could not share the same platform with representatives of a regime widely blamed for a poor human rights record. For the British Ambassador it could be understandable as it later emerged that there were probably more pressing issues at home with Prime Minister Tony Blair resigning on the same day.

In fact what happened on Thursday had been ironically captured in the very title of the debate: “The perceived role played by the media in the con(de)struction of bilateral relations between Zimbabwe and Britain and the USA: The case of what ought to be and what is”.

What could more clearly and emphatically demonstrate the gulf that exists between the ideal and reality? Ideally that all opinions should be given an equal opportunity to compete in the market place of ideas forms the bedrock of democratic liberalism but this has probably not happened anywhere else in the world, no not even in the so called cradles of democracy in the west. In fact Mr Charamba dismissed as fiction the argument that there was any free press in the world and that the watchdog role the press claims for itself was inherently compromised as media are always pandering to the interests of those who own them.

Mr Charamba said he did not find any problem with both Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) and the Broadcasting Services Act and state regulation of the media in general since every state has a legitimate interest in the opinion formation process of its people.

"Press freedom may be the ideal but it has remained exactly that - a case of what ought to be. The reality is that western governments exercise the same if not much more insidious control on their media by simply going to bed with media owners. Otherwise, how does one explain the phenomenon of embedded journalism so popularised in the western media's coverage of the invasion of Iraqi," said Mr Charamba.

He went on to say it was more important to talk about freedom of expression which the Constitution of Zimbabwe guarantees in Section 20, rather than on the narrow interests of the press in a country that is largely rural and where much of the communication takes place by means other than solely through the press.

By the Oracle

Perception management key to success of RBZ's social contract

The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe’s Social Contract faces a crisis of public acceptance if the central bank fails to undertake an active public awareness campaign.

What the general populace perceive of the social contract is the escalation of prices, the run away inflation now hovering above 2200%, stagnant salaries accompanied by an ever deteriorating standard of living. At the present moment, according to the Central Statistics Office figures, the Poverty Datum Line has skipped to $1,7 million for a family of five.

As the central bank mooted the idea of the social contract, firms have been on the offensive as they tried to preemptively run away from frozen prices before the March deadline. However, as the date came and went, nothing has happened except the ever riding up of prices much to the detriment of those unfortunate to be price takers.

Manufacturers have raised prices without raising wages for their employees. The government has not intervened, neither has the RBZ. This has created distrust between the parties to the social contract idea.

Initially, the social contract idea was not well marketed to the various publics with some of the participants having the suspicion that they might be the loser in the program. This has not helped the worker whose representation is sharply divided along political faultlines.

When the RBZ Governor visited the Midlands State University, quite a number of students interviewed before and after his address either did not know or had a vague understanding of the social contract idea. If university students fail to understand this then a different story will have to be told for the odinary man on the street - another case of the media shortchanging the Zimbabwean audience.

The majority of the Zimbabweans understand the Social Contract as an economic blueprint that has nothing to do with the ‘social’ that it claims to be. Now the tallest question is ‘how social is the contract?’ This question hovers in the minds of all affected Zimbabweans since the hardest hit part of their lives is the economic side.

However, this social contract has to be made up of various social partners that have the mandate to sit down and negotiate the way forward. The main partners are Government, Business and Labour. To act on the sidelines as advisors should be the church, the academia, the civic groups, political parties and the international community. The media sould obviously play a catalytic role by providing the public space for open debate on the issues.

It is the duty of every negotiating partner to negotiate in good faith, act responsibly, shun selfishness, put Zimbabwe first and have confidence with the other stakeholders, urged Dr Gono addressing the students. But these basic requirements will remain lacking in the absents of information.

What have we? Business is hiking prices and suppressing wages, labor is calling for higher wages, unity among workers is fragmented, civil servants salaries are pityable, political intolerance is rife and cooperation between government and civil society is frictional. Opposition parties and the ruling party do not see eye to eye. The church itself no longer speaks with one voice, in fact men and women of the cloth speak in many tounges. The academia seems to have a hazy understanding of the issues at hand.

It remains a tall order for the central bank to consolidate its efforts to bring the intended result. Since March, prices have been on the loose, political competition has been bloody, industrial action has been the order of industry following suppressed wages. Consumer rights groups have been and still are taking an infinite nap while communication of the idea has not been fully executed. Nowhere near Zimbabwe has a social contract been employed to heal the ills suffered by a people.

The central bank has to go back to the drawing board and come up with a more vigorous percetion management strategy to drill people into supporting this otherwise noble idea. With the current (mis)understanding of the idea, the general public's perception is that a social contract is a catalyst of inflation and a declining standard of living.

By Precious Chibhira Bsc Hons Media and Society Studies, Level 2.2 MSU

Whatever has happened to humour in our media?

The lack of or the absence of humour in the Zimbabwean mass media is reflective of how far intolerant of opposing views we have become as a society.

The depiction of social ills in a humorous way is limited to cartoon sections and a few columns like the Financial Gazette’s Cabinet files, the few satiric expositions remain insufficient in fostering democratic debate through the mass media.

In progressive democracies humour or satire is a common feature used by commentators in addressing social vices and in playing the watchdog role on those in authority. The lack of humour in our mass media tells a lot about the culture of intolerance of oppositional views in the Zimbabwean society.

“Unrestrained liberty which is critical to democracy means being able to tell people what they do not want to hear” says Takura Zhangazha of MISA Zimbabwe.

The South African media is a stride ahead of Zimbabwe in promoting democracy and pluralism and this is also shown by the presence of humour within their mass media. Chenjerai Hove’s Article in the Mail and Guardian of 25 February to 4 March initialled “In the Mind of a Dictator” is an example of a satiric expose of tyrant leaders.

Because of ownership patterns in our mass media, legislation such as POSA and AIPPA and the threat of victimisation, the use of humour is compromised.

The Public Order and Security Act (POSA) section 16 cripples the potential of the media to satirise the President in person or his office.

The Offences Against Constitutional Government and Public Security section criminalizes the Undermining of authority or insulting President in whatever way.

Such immunity does not have a place in a true democracy because it provides unnecessary cover to politicians who ironically are supposed to be answerable to the public.

Bill Saidi the acting Editor of The Standard bore witness on how certain sections of our society fail to tolerate humour as a way of commenting on certain social issues.

A cartoon of Monkeys laughing at the Zimbabwean Army personnel’s pay slips carried in The Standard culminated in Saidi receiving a bullet in a brown envelope and a threat to “watch out”.

As a reaction to these threats Saidi went on to give sound opinions on how leaders who are intolerant towards humour have the tendency of becoming dictators.

Contrary to satiric exposure the public media adopts what can be termed as “hate speech” which demonstrates immense hatred of those who hold opposed views to our own or which are not inclined to the dominant ideology we seek to promote. It is important to point out that in Zimbabwe experience on the ground clearly show that the government has no monopoly over this intolerance.

In columns such as Nathaniel Manheru’s “The Other Side” and Dr Mahoso’s “African Focus” and much of Caesar Zvayi’s articles these elements of hate speech are predominant. Labelling is a common feature within these columns; the opposition are often dubbed “puppets” and the civil society “evil”

Referring to the former minister of information and publicity Prof Jonathan Moyo, Nathaniel Manheru had such malice in the The Saturday Herald, July 8, 2006 “Now he dares tell anyone about Zimbabwe’s politics, which have vomited him to fringes, set to be buried come next poll? Come on!” Such is the common use of hate speech.

This hate speech does not promote public debate where ideas are supposed to fight each other with the weaker ones dying a natural death but instead it promotes hatred between people of different views.

Satiric commentary should be a tradition in a true democracy and unpopular speech should not be criminalised, as it remains vital to the health of public opinion.

In promoting democracy the mass media has to be more accommodative to humour and understand that the debate about public affairs is not always done with evil motives.

Satire remains critical to freedom of expression that is not only an aspect of individual liberty but essential for the quest for truth and vitality of society as a whole.

By Darlington Muyambwa, Bsc Honours Media and Society Studies Level 2.2, MSU