A presentation to the Media Alliance of
Zimbabwe, 2018 Annual Media Stakeholders Conference
02 November
2018, Sapes Trust , Harare, Zimbabwe.
By Takura
Zhangazha*
Colleagues,
cdes and friends,
I have been
asked to discuss, albeit briefly, strategic issues of the media in Zimbabwe,
going forward. I am not sure how far forward we should look. But I
would assume that so long we look forward, it helps.
And perhaps
that has been the primary fault of the media sector, an inability to perceive
or even try to predict what the future may look like. Not only in terms
of the issues that I understand were discussed yesterday, for example the new
interface or even competition between social media platforms and the mainstream
media. Or the debate around how public broadcasting, in both its national
and community broadcasting sense, has to have its definitive parameters
redrawn. As well as how journalists welfare and unionism impacts on their
professional an ethical conduct against the backdrop of allegations of media
capture, editorial control and neo-liberal assumptions of the media as
profitable business.
But what is
in vogue for many media stakeholders is a specific political reality of a newly
elected government that has said it is ‘open for business’. The primary
assumption being that it is also open for the business of discussing the media,
and its primary concerns. Or at least what the media and media stakeholders
expect from government.
What I would
definitely agree with is that the media stakeholders conference, judging by the
statements of the relatively new Minister of Information, Publicity and Broadcasting
Services (MIPBS) Monica Mutsvangwa, should not look a gift horse in the mouth
given the assumption that she/government means well.
But just to
give a key reminder that media stakeholders have been here before. That
is, a situation where government promises reforms, extends their implementation
period and then claims success over its own ineptitude or lack of political
will to implement what it has consultatively promised.
That is why
at the back of media stakeholders minds we are still whispering about the Information
and Media Public inquiry (IMPI) recommendations ( as numerous as they were).
But in an Alpha
Media Holdings Conversations (AMH) facebook live discussion I participated in
with co-panelists Mr. Nyarota , Ms Patience Zirima and the deputy minister
of MPIBS, Honourable Energy Mutodi, I mentioned that we cannot revert to past
narratives of how government interacts with the press. Mainstream or
emergent in the form of new social media motivated platforms of access to
information.
Strategically
considered, Zimbabwe’s media in all it various facets (mainstream, social,
mediums/technological, legal) must begin to chart a new path in the best public
democratic interest. The latter being defined largely as a media that
does not flinch from being more robust, self correcting, technologically savvy
and democratically conscious of its role in furthering Zimbabwe’s democratic
values and principles.
In the
context of the Media Alliance of Zimbabwe’s work, this would require a
contextual reinvigoration of its annual media strategy to not only suit our
technological times but also expand the democratic value proposition of freedom
of expression and access to information.
The broad
thematic arenas of MAZ have been media policy an reforms, media plurality and
diversity (and its sub themes of alternative media, freedom of expression,
independent mainstream media , sustainable community media , public service
media), media professionalism and ethics and finally safe, equitable and
enabling environments for journalists.
In our
national context these thematic focus areas remain relevant not only by way of
reference but more significantly in reality. We still do not have, as
cited by stakeholders here present adequate media policy reforms. Nor do
we have media plurality and diversity. Let alone media professionalism
and ethics nor an equitable and enabling environment for journalists and media
workers.
On the basis
of the above, there is therefore no need to reinvent the wheel. It
basically means we still have to address these primary challenges as enunciated
in the MAZ Media Strategy Framework for Zimbabwe.
The key
question is do we use the same methods for the same problems? The easy
answer would be indeed we should.
The caution
however is the speed at which we arrive at our envisioned destination.
Whereas we have been cognizant of the opportunities that come with an
incremental change template to the media environment, we have lost sight to the
fact that the media is increasingly losing its democratic value proposition in
the best public interest. And that the
Zimbabwean public may still perceive the media more as an elitist institution
that serves the interests of those in power (be it in politics, business and
religion) more than it may be focused on playing its independent and critical democratic
role.
Hence the
public in part has turned to social media platforms to seek their own version
of the truth or to confirm the news that they would prefer to hear.
It is in
this context that media stakeholders must undertake some strategic changes to
their approach to Zimbabwe’s media reform agenda.
Top of these
strategic reconsiderations is to understand the media from a political economy
perspective. That is to initially
emphasise its organic political reason for its existence which remains to
enable and enhance freedom of expression and access to information in the
democratic public interest. And this
from an entirely holistic perspective (print, broadcast, social media, medium-
technology).
In this same
framework to then strategically look at how the media must be sustained in
order to achieve its overarching political and economic objective. This is the economic side of the media. While I am aware that MIPBS has already
announced its broad ‘media as business’ policy intentions, we must be cautious
in arguing for a solely profit motivated mainstream and new media strategic
framework. This sort of framework leads
to multi-media ownership as is the case now in Zimbabwe with the larger media
companies beginning to monopolise the sector’s various media formats (radio,
print, television, new media). And this
includes telecommunications companies that are also entering the broadcasting
fray via the internet or provision of the mediums (data and fibre optic)
without due consideration to issues of costs and its impact on public access.
These economic
considerations should be also undertaken with a democratic understanding of the
still important role of the public media.
And how to get the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation out of the clutches
of a partisan editorial policy and the profit motivated intentions by
government of putting it out to dry against better equipped and soon to be
licensed private broadcasters.
We have
already seen this encroachment into the public service community broadcasting
sphere where the licensing of commercial private local radio stations has quite
literally taken over the significant strides that some community radio stations
had made. We need only look at what
happened to Radio Dialogue in Bulawayo and the awkward takeover of its actual
studio space by SkyzMetro FM.
As I
outlined earlier, in relation to the actual MAZ strategy the focus areas of
stakeholders remain key. They however
tend to lose sight of the bigger picture where and when stakeholders either act
in silos or compete for their sectoral interest either with government or
international partners.
What is
strategically required is a greater unity of purpose and shared understanding
of the urgency of an organic political economy approach to media reforms in
Zimbabwe. One which understands that the
current government’s economic policy of being open for business should not
translate to media freedom, freedom of expression and access to information being
sacrificed at the altar of media for private profit model.
Thank you
very much and all the best.
*Takura
Zhangazha spoke here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment