By Takura Zhangazha*
Zimbabwe’s mainstream and emerging media have always been
faced with the challenge of sustainability in a number of respects. Top of the list in recent years has always
been the challenge of viability and ability to generate revenue to remain going
concerns. Other’s relating again to sustainability
include maintaining its integrity and professionalism so as to remain valued by
the Zimbabwean public for its essential democratic role.
In the wake of Covid 19 this question sustainability has
become even more apparent if not downright debilitating for the mainstream
media as a key element of a democratic state. The democratic assumption of its
role as a ‘fourth estate’ of society is evidently under siege as it relates to
its short, medium and long term sustainability.
Due to government ordered lockdowns, the mainstream media
has like any other industry been faced with a reduction in its capacity to
disseminate public interest news and entertainment. Be it in electronic (radio/TV), print media,
community media or emerging online news platforms that focus on professional
journalistic content.
While it remains the print media that is hardest hit in
relation to actual sales or advertising revenue, the very fact that all other
media platforms that rely on producing ethical, professional content for
readers, viewers and listeners in the public interest are incapacitated makes
this a sector wide dilemna.
It also makes the sustainability crisis of Zimbabwe’s media
one that requires all hands on deck in order to keep the essential democratic
role of the media in enabling freedom of expression and access to
information. This, as outlined in not
only our national constitution’s bill of rights (sections 61 and 62) but also
as observed as international best practice and in the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (Article 19).
The media therefore must exist. Where it is facing serious
challenges to its viability as is the case with the Covid19 pandemic, it must
be assisted to stay afloat in order to fulfill its democratic public interest
role of enabling free expression and access to information.
In my view, the urgency of keep in free expression, access
to information and media freedom as key democratic priority areas requires a
media bailout funding framework. Not
just for state owned/controlled media or public media but also privately owned/controlled media. In their
various forms and mediums.
In other sectors such as tourism, banking or manufacturing this is also sometimes referred to as a stimulus
package for what governments refer to as critical industries.
The media may not be on priority lists of economic pundits vis-a-vis its democratic national importance or necessity in times of crisis. However in
the current context, before Covid 19 and in the future, the media is an essential
democratic service that requires new sustainability frameworks that support it
to remain operational. Especially in
light of lockdowns.
A key question that emerges is where would any funding for bailing
out struggling media entities come from?
An easy answer tot that is that the primary guarantor of such bailout funding
should be the state. Just as much as the
state has to set up funding frameworks for arts and culture, tourism or mining,
it is clear that it has a democratic obligation to enable media
sustainability. Even if the government of
the day does not agree with editorial positions of various media houses an
independent funding framework enabled by the state is entirely possible.
Enabling however does not mean there are no other stakeholders
that should play a role. Those that can
and who have free expression and access to information in a democratic society
at heart should be able to either participate or set up their own media
sustainability funding frameworks. Based on their own philanthropic or other
values, the contributions of other stakeholders in helping keep Zimbabwe’s
media not only afloat but professionally, ethically and democratically viable
can only be encouraged and welcomed with open arms.
The mechanisms of this media bailout fund would be expressly
for those that need it. In our case, one way or the other it is a majority of mainstream
and emerging online journalistic media that would require it. It would function more like an assistance fund,
where grants are given in the immediate to media hoses based on a set of criteria
arrived at by all stakeholders. This criteria
will include also assistance for media houses that are focusing on new ways of working
and disseminating journalistic news. All via a democratically independent
adjudication process.
And for this, I think it is imperative that Zimbabwean media
stakeholders meet to initially address and hopefully agree on what would be the
objectives, operational mechanisms and expected results of such a media bailout
funding framework. However complex it
may initially appear and whatever divergent ideological vies of the media.
What remains evident is that the media in our context cannot
simply be viewed as a business. It is an
essential aspect of our democracy. However
flawed the latter may be viewed to be. While
media owners, journalists and media support organisations may currently be
struggling with new ways of working, they should not however lose sight of the
democratic necessity of their existence. Even more so in a time of the pandemic that is
Covid 19 and increasingly arbitrary means of controlling the public by
governments across the world.
*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity
(takura-zhangazha,blogspot.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment