(RSF/IFEX) – RSF has condemned the state-owned media’s coverage of the Movement for Democratic (MDC) opposition party’s campaign in the run-up to 31 March 2005 parliamentary elections as “clearly unfair”. The organisation also criticised recent threats by the head of the Media and Information Commission (MIC) to impose sanctions on “The Zimbabwean” newspaper, on the […]
(RSF/IFEX) – RSF has condemned the state-owned media’s coverage of the Movement for Democratic (MDC) opposition party’s campaign in the run-up to 31 March 2005 parliamentary elections as “clearly unfair”. The organisation also criticised recent threats by the head of the Media and Information Commission (MIC) to impose sanctions on “The Zimbabwean” newspaper, on the grounds that it is a “propaganda tool.”
“It is now evident that the 31 March legislative elections will take place in a climate of intimidation and censorship,” RSF said. “There will clearly be no compliance with the democratic criteria established by the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) and the African Union’s treaties. Robert Mugabe’s government is violating the principles of free expression with impunity and Zimbabweans will pay the price. It is time the countries of southern Africa stopped looking passively on while one of their own slips into the shadows.”
Media bias
With the election campaign already officially under way, the MDC, which currently has 50 representatives in Parliament, is extremely handicapped by the lack of coverage it is getting from the state media, when it is not actually disparaged by it.
In a letter to MDC secretary-general Welshman Ncube, Pikirayi Deketeke, editor-in-chief of the state-owned daily “The Herald”, said it “would offer no political party special access” to the newspaper. The letter was in response to an MDC request that the state media cover its activities. Deketeke asserted that the request had nothing to do with the traditional state media policy of offering special, free political broadcasts during general elections.
The Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe (MMPZ), an independent Harare-based watchdog, reported that, during the week of 14 to 20 February, 19 of the 28 articles about the election campaign in the state press defended the ruling Zanu-PF party and the other nine disparaged the MDC. During the week of 21 to 27 February, 58 of the 66 articles about the election campaign were devoted to Zanu-PF.
The editor-in-chief of Newsnet, a propaganda branch of the state-owned Zimbabwe Broadcasting Holding (ZBH), told the MDC in a letter that it would be granted two interviews, on 7 and 18 March, that it could take part in a debate on 14 March, and that there would be coverage of an MDC meeting on 25 March. ZBH also offered the MDC a total of 91 minutes of air time for the broadcasting of spots lasting no more than 60 seconds each, but the MDC would have to pay for these in cash. The privately-owned weekly “The Zimbabwe Independent” calculated that an electoral spot during prime time would cost 3.7 million dollars (approx. $US615; 460 euros) each time it aired, a sizeable sum in Zimbabwe.
On 3 October 2004, then information minister Jonathan Moyo said the MDC would be refused access to the state media during the election campaign. “Until we have a loyal opposition, it will be impossible for it to access the public media,” Moyo said (see IFEX alerts of 18 and 8 October 2004).
Threats against “The Zimbabwean”
Tafataona Mahoso, chairman of the government-controlled MIC, the press regulatory body, has meanwhile threatened to sanction “The Zimbabwean”, a new, privately-owned weekly published in London and distributed in Zimbabwe and South Africa. The state-owned “The Herald” quoted Mahoso on 7 March as saying “The Zimbabwean” was a “propaganda tool” supported by “secret funds in Europe and North America.” “The Zimbabwean” was created by Wilf Mbanga, the exiled founder of the leading independent “The Daily News”.
In “The Herald” article, Mahoso and the article’s author took particular issue with the fact that the most recent issue of “The Zimbabwean” included a promotional insert paid for by Britain’s House of Commons, praising the newspaper’s management. “The Herald” quoted Mahoso describing this as “unprecedented” and likening the British parliamentarians to South Africa’s former Apartheid regime.
The article did not specify what sanctions might be imposed against “The Zimbabwean”. “The Herald” simply noted that the MIC had said last month that it “would not hesitate to take the necessary steps to stop those who abuse journalism by using secret funding to produce products intended to undermine national and sovereign publishers who are making an honest living by informing their readers.”
In January, Mahoso threatened to close the privately-owned “Weekly Times” newspaper just one week after it published its first issue. The newspaper’s licence was withdrawn just a few weeks later, on 25 February, on the grounds that its owners had made a “false statement” and “failed to disclose certain facts”. Mahoso claimed that the newspaper tricked him when it registered its licence by hiding certain aspects of its editorial line. According to its statutes, the “Weekly Times” is a privately-owned news weekly focussing on development issues (see IFEX alerts of 1 March and 12 January 2005).
