MMPZ Report 2October – 8 October 2006

THIS week the government-controlled media censored the court’s criticism on the failure by the police to investigate the brutal assault in police custody of the ZimbabweCongress of Trade Union (ZCTU) leaders following the organization’s foiled demonstration against economic decline in the country.

This only appeared in the private media.
For example, Studio 7 (3 & 4/10), New Zimbabwe.com (4/10), The Financial Gazette (5/10) and Zimdaily (6/10) reported that magistrate William Bhila had criticized the police for failing to produce a report on the vicious beatings of the ZCTU leaders as ordered by the court three weeks previously.

They revealed that instead of submitting a report before the trial of the unionists, the police produced affidavits claiming that “only minimum force” had been used against the ZCTU leaders after “heavily resisting arrest”.

Reportedly, the magistrate was obliged to defer the case to October 17 and instructed the police’s Criminal Investigations Department to conduct investigations, saying, “regular police were not taking the matter seriously”.

In addition, the private media reported the Zimbabwe Association of Doctors for Human Rights disputing official claims that the unionists’ injuries were self-inflicted. The doctors’ group noted that its medical examination of the injured leadersrevealed their injuries to be consistent with “torture” and “beatings with blunt objects, heavy enough to causefractures to hands and arms and severe and multiple soft tissue injuries to the backs of the head, shoulders, arms,
buttocks and thighs”.

Again the government media ignored this.

Instead, The Herald and Chronicle (6/10) passively quoted Deputy Minister of Home Affairs, Reuben Marumahoko insisting,“no one was assaulted in the police cells”, adding that the unionists had “injured themselves while trying to resist arrest by jumping off moving vehicles”.

Apart from suffocating the court’s censure of police conduct, the official media also remained silent on other cases of continued rights violations during the week.

Only the private media carried news of three incidents of rights abuses.

These included the arrest of university students and teachers’ union leaders and the eviction and demolition of Porta Farm settlers’ homes by Harare council authorities.

2. The economy and consumers

DURING the week the government-controlled media failed to adequately address the erosion of consumers’ socio-economic rights caused by the continued decline in Zimbabwe’s economy.

Their 35 stories on the matter – 12 of which were on ZBH and 23 in government papers – did not give a holistic picture on how a new spate of price increases had greatly compromised the buying power of the public, or how they were linked to government’s inflationary economic policies.

Instead, they simply blamed unscrupulous businesses for the economic misery while simultaneously projecting the authorities as taking measures to protect the people from exploitation.

ZBH’s coverage of the increases, was sparse.
Most of its stories just announced new price increases in goods and services without interrogation. Consequently, there was no analysis on the impact of the price hikes on people’s consumption patterns. This lack of investigative effort was reflected by the fact that only three of the 12 stories that ZBH carried on the matter cared to seek the views of ordinary people.

For example, Spot FM’s coverage (6/10 1pm, 8pm & 7/10, 1pm) on the increase in the Consumer Council of Zimbabwe(CCZ) family basket from $96 000 in August to $112 000 in September lacked analysis. It did not, for example, test the truth of the basket against the soaring prices of services and commodities.

Instead, it just reported CCZ as planning to introduce a new “Tsaona Basket” (Crisis basket) that would contain fewer products a family of six would need monthly for basic survival without quizzing the logic of the move or explaining how it would translate into bringing food to the tables of the consumers.

The government Press’ stories (12 of which were on the increase in the price of goods and services and 11 on commodity shortages) generally portrayed government as championing the cause of the consumers in the face of profiteering by businesses.

It was against this background that they reported approvingly of government’s planned enforcement of its price control regime without question (The Herald 3 & 6/10). For example, the paper (3/10) passively reported unnamed economists hailing the move as a “positive step” that would “flush out some price distortions on the market”. No assessment of the move’s impact on industry viability or availability of goods was made, especially in view of the fact that previous price controls have invariably resulted in acute commodity shortages.

In fact, criticism of the development by other analysts such as the Zimbabwe National Chamber of Commerce (ZNCC) were buried deep in the story and never fully explored.

The next day the Chronicle (4/10) approvingly reported on the new controlled bread price of $295 a loaf, down from the bakers’ proposed cost of $335, as a reflection of the effectiveness of the authorities’ measures. Consequently, it did not reconcile the new price with the bakers’ viability or its affordability. Neither did it say how government arrived at the figure.

However, in a rare display of openness The Herald and Chronicle (5/10) reported the Parliamentary Legal Committee on Budget and Finance expressing concern over the country’s worsening economic problems saying government’s fiscal and monetary policies had “failed to adequately address…inflation” as they “just narrated the woes besetting the country…without proffering solutions”.

Although the government papers’ sourcing pattern appeared diverse as shown in Fig. 2, their stance remained largely uncritical of the impact of government’s economic mismanagement on the public. The private media performed better.

Their 28 stories on the topic (private electronic media [3] and private papers [25]) either highlighted the effects of economic distress on the public or examined the extent of the decline, which they blamed on government’s poor policies.

The issues they tackled included difficulties the public was facing in getting fuel, food, transport and medical treatment, among problems people faced accessing goods and services in other sectors.

The Daily Mirror (6/10), for example, carried a table highlighting exorbitant prices of basic commodities being charged by the country’s main retailers, noting – in another story – that the rapidly spiralling cost of living had forced teachers to “concentrate on other money-spinning jobs” to supplement their meagre salaries.

The extent of the consumers’ economic woes was further underscored by revelations that the value of the local currency had suddenly plunged by nearly 100 percent against international currencies, triggering more price increases (the Gazette 5/10, Zimbabwe Independent (6/10) and The Standard 8/10).

The government media ignored the development that has resulted in the Zimbabwe dollar trading at more than $1 200 to the US dollar on the parallel market.

Instead, in its Financial Highlights ZTV (2/10, 8pm & 5/10, 8pm) chose to mislead its audiences by claiming that “the Zimbabwe dollar gained slightly against key currencies on the official market…” adding, “no notable changes were recorded in most key currencies as low volume exports failed to move the green-back above the $250 mark…”
Studio 7 and Zimdaily.com completely ignored the subject.

3. Election countdown
LIKE the previous week, the media maintained their indifferent coverage of local government polls and the Chikomba and Rushinga by-elections.

The government media carried 35 stories on the matter: ZBH (29) and government papers (six). However, this did not translate into informed analysis of the electoral process.

For example, these media’s stories largely failed to inform their audiences about the electoral framework under which the Chikomba and Rushinga by-elections and the 20 rural district council ward polls were conducted. Neither did they give informed follow-ups on the electoral authorities’ preparations for the remaining local government polls scheduled for this month-end.

In fact, all six stories carried by the official Press on elections focused on ZANU PF campaigns and none discussed the mechanics governing the polls or on the opposition’s preparations.

But while the official papers ignored the MDC campaigns and their concerns on the conduct of the elections, they carried several stories on the Zambian elections, which they used to vilify the opposition as bad losers.
The pattern was the same on ZBH.

In open breach of the Broadcasting Services Act, which compels the state broadcaster to give “reasonable” access to all contesting parties during elections, ZBH only covered ZANU PF campaigns in all its six stories on the subject. In addition, it carried 10 other stories on various donations of computers, agricultural inputs and equipment by senior government
officials, including President Mugabe, which promoted ZANU PF ahead of the polls.

None of this was interpreted as vote-buying.

Such a professionally docile manner also manifested itself in The Herald (2/10), which reported Air Force of Zimbabwe Commander Perence Shiri as having campaigned for “ZANU PF” during a prize-giving day at Kwenda High School in Hwedza at which he made monetary donations.

The paper did not question the timing of the donation or his active involvement in political campaigns as a soldier. However, the next day the paper retracted the story saying that although Shiri had called on the electorate to “vote wisely” for a party that “had a history and is tried and tested”, he had not mentioned any party by name. Notably, ruling party officials
have previously used similar language when campaigning for ZANU PF.

Government papers did not report on the administration of elections except carrying seven Zimbabwe Election Commission (ZEC) adverts on the polls. Of these, six were on the results of the nomination courts while one, which appeared on the day
of the elections, was on the location of polling stations for Rushinga and Chikomba polls.

While ZBH seems to have covered the elections more widely as mirrored in Fig 4, their reports remained basicallyuninformative and grossly biased.

4. The electronic media’s coverage of electoral issues

For instance, all its reports on the administration of elections were mere regurgitations of ZEC’s pronouncements on its “smooth” electoral preparations or the announcement of the Chikomba and Rushinga election results, won by ZANU PF. There was no attempt to independently verify the adequacy of the planning, particularly in view of allegations by the Zimbabwe Election Support Network (ZESN) of poor preparations (Studio 7 5/10). The broadcaster limited itself to just airing several ZEC adverts urging people to vote and what identification particulars they needed to be able to elect their council and parliamentary representatives.

The government media’s unprofessional coverage of the polls was reflected by their sourcing pattern as captured.

Notably, government officials used ‘national’ events to campaign for the ruling party. In addition, the broadcaster heavildepended on handouts from the electoral authorities for its coverage.

The private media hardly performed any better.

They devoted just 10 stories to the elections, seven of which appeared in private papers and three in the private electronic media.

Even then, four of the stories published in the Mirror stable were largely replicas of stories appearing in the government
media and barely subjected the electoral process to any scrutiny. Three of these either vilified the opposition or passively
endorsed the electoral environment. Only one quoted both ZANU PF and the MDC fancying their chances of winning the
polls.

The paper also carried five voter-education adverts inserted by the ZEC.

In contrast, almost all the stories Studio 7 (5/10) and the online agency Zimdaily.com (6/10) carried on the elections were
restricted to exposing electoral violence allegedly perpetrated against the opposition by ruling party supporters and state
security agents, recording eight incidents as shown in Fig. 7. They included Studio 7’s coverage of a report by ZESN
revealing poor electoral preparations and “discriminatory” new nomination regulations it claimed had disadvantaged the
opposition in the Chikomba and Rushinga elections.

The government media ignored these issues. They only alluded to the issue when The Sunday Mail (8/10), Radio
Zimbabwe and ZTV (8/10, 6pm) reported MDC losing candidate for Rushinga Kudakwashe Chideya refusing to endorse the
result because of “several” electoral irregularities. However, they did not provide details on what these were.

The private electronic media’s coverage of the elections
However, The Standard reported on more electoral irregularities in two of the three stories it carried on the forthcoming
council polls. One exposed how senior ruling party officials had forced the Tsholotsho nomination court to “extend its
sitting by five hours” to ensure the nomination of one of its candidates, whose papers had been rejected by electoral
authorities while the other was on the MDC’s intention to legally challenge the disqualification of 400 of their candidatesduring the nomination process.

The remainder exposed in-house fighting in ZANU PF, which resulted in it fielding two sets of candidates in all Kadoma’s wards.

The Gazette and Independent ignored the elections.

The private Press’ attempts to balance its coverage were mirrored by its voice distribution. See
Edited.