Media Under Siege, a report on media coverage of the 2002 presidential and mayoral elections in Zimbabwe, begins with a paragraph discussing a propaganda manual used in 1994 by Rwandan media, now notorious for inciting genocide. The manual argued for an approach called “accusation in a mirror”, in which the enemy would be accused of carrying out acts that the accusers themselves were planning or executing. It is this “uncanny echo” that Media Under Siege begins with, and with the horror of Rwanda imprinted on the psyche of Africa, it is a chilling comparison. But this report does not set out to warn that Zimbabwe will become another Rwanda. Rather, and as laid out in the conclusion, it is a pointed warning to those working in the public media that their time will come.
The report concludes: “The evidence from the output of Zimpapers and ZBC points overwhelmingly to the existence of a deliberate campaign to disseminate lies with the aims of discrediting the political opposition and inciting violence against the MDC and its supporters…” It does go on to acknowledge that the prospect of journalists being charged is a distant one. “But it is important that the legal obligations and accountability of journalists be clearly understood.”
Media Under Siege is an in depth look at the media context of the 2002 elections and some of the major events covered by the media, including the victimisation of the Amani Trust, the alleged assassination plot against Robert Mugabe and some of the more outlandish conspiracy theories advanced in the public media. It talks through the pre-poll, poll and post-poll context in a format that compares how the public media covered issues in relation to the private media, and visa versa. Some of the statistics are astonishing and clearly indicate the vested interests of the media and the massive dived between the public media on one side and the private media on the other. For example, Radio Zimbabwe quoted a total of 304 official party voices of the contesting parties. Of these, Zanu-PF was quoted 258 times (85 percent), while the MDC was quoted 28 times (nine percent). And out of a total of 14 hours and 41 minutes and 30 seconds that ZBC television news bulletins devoted to the presidential elections campaign between December 2001 and March 2002, Zanu-PF’s candidate was granted a total of 13 hours 50 minutes and 30 seconds, or a little more than 94 percent.
This is not to say that the report is uncritical of the shortcomings in the coverage of events by the Daily News, and this is frequently pointed out. But the difference is that this is constructive criticism of mistakes carried out in the line of duty. In the case of the public media, criticism is more scathing. “Bad journalism was what Zimpapers and the ZBC did in the now distant past, when they at least aspired to practise journalism of some description. In the 2002 election campaign their business was not journalism at all. At its most benign it was to sow confusion; at its worst it was used as a tool to incite hatred and violence.”
This report might not be the glossiest publication you ever lay your hands on, but it is a gritty account of the media environment over the election period and will be of value to anyone with even a passing interest in the media. The report does not cover the subsequent closure of the Daily News, but this does not matter. Its indictment of the public media for its failure to fulfil its most basic journalistic responsibilities during the election period makes clear the huge hole that the closure of the Daily News has left in Zimbabwe.
Media Under Siege is published by the Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe, an independent Trust that works to promote responsible journalism in Zimbabwe.
ISBN: 0-7974-2736-8
Contact Details:
15 Duthrie Avenue
Alexandra Park
Harare
Tel/Fax: 263 4 703 702
[email][email protected]
[email][email protected]
