The government media, however, suffocated fresh controversies in the mining of Chiadzwa diamonds and increasing cases of rights violations against civic activists, MDC supporters and villagers.

 Fig 1: Popular stories in the media

State media obscure crisis talks failure

The government media deliberately obscured the failure of the power sharing talks between ZANU PF and the two MDC formations.

Despite these media promoting ZANU PF’s position last week that “nothing had been agreed” at the talks, their 25 reports on the subject this week gave the impression that the parties had succeeded in ironing out most of their differences, except those relating to sanctions, within SADC’s March 29 deadline. And while they quoted unnamed sources dismissing the MDC-T’s concerns as “administrative”, these media allowed unidentified and ZANU PF sources space to deny that talks facilitator, Jacob Zuma, had set the parties a deadline to submit a report.

The Herald (1/4) buried progress of the dialogue in a report on the long-overdue swearing into office of members of the human rights and election commissions. Patrick Chinamasa, ZANU PF’s chief negotiator, was passively quoted saying the parties hoped to decide what issues had been agreed and what had not during the day without once referring to the parties as having missed the SADC deadline. ZTV (1/4, 8pm) & The Herald (2/4) sanitized this failure by reporting that the negotiators had eventually concluded their dialogue on March 31 and had submitted a verbal report to Zuma’s facilitation team. Earlier, The Herald (30/3) quoted presidential spokesman George Charamba claiming that the parties were not even obliged to submit a report to Zuma. He said the coalition principals would only do so “out of courtesy” and for Zuma’s “own benefit” so that he would be informed when he met the chairman of SADC’s Organ on Security, Mozambican President Armando Guebuza, to apprise him on the progress of the dialogue.

These media also ensured there was no clarity on what the parties had agreed. ZBC (3/3, 8pm) & The Sunday Mail (4/4) simply quoted President Mugabe claiming that “all the issues” under the Global Political Agreement (GPA) except sanctions had been addressed.

Among their 11 other stories on power-sharing issues the government media prominently publicized the swearing-in of the members of the human rights and election commissions, which they touted as proof of government’s progress in complying with the GPA.

News of the indictment of Deputy Agriculture Minister-designate Roy Bennett on fresh criminal charges, of illegally hoarding maize in 2001, and war veterans’ demonstrations against Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai for allegedly failing to denounce Western sanctions, also figured prominently in these media.

The private media gave a completely different – and more credible – picture; focusing on the parties’ evident failure to meet the SADC deadline, and quoting sources saying the parties were still poles apart over a number of issues, among them the unilateral appointment of senior government officials and sanctions. These media also reported MDC-T and Bennett’s lawyers arguing that his indictment was politically motivated and represented a new threat to the coalition’s stability.

The Financial Gazette (1/4) quoted unnamed commentators speculating that Zuma’s ability to tackle Zimbabwe’s political deadlock was undermined by a fear of his presidency being overshadowed by the crisis, like his predecessor, Thabo Mbeki, and the possibility of it “stealing the limelight” from South Africa’s hosting of the FIFA World Cup in June.

Wide publicity for Malema’s ZANU PF visit

The government media enthusiastically endorsed ZANU PF’s publicity stunt of inviting ANC Youth League chairman, Julius Malema, to visit Zimbabwe and promote the credentials of “the revolutionary party” and its controversial policies, such as land reform and black economic empowerment.

Accordingly, they gave his more predictable comments wide publicity and dismissed consternation over Malema’s use of “hate language” against some sections of the South African community as a reflection of white resistance to the emancipation of black Africans (ZTV, 31/3, 8pm, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5/4, 8pm & The Sunday Mail, 4/4).

But they censored Malema’s vigorous criticism of the use of violence to intimidate voters during elections at a ZANU PF youth rally in Mbare, while The Sunday Mail widely reported Malema commending ZANU PF’s chaotic land reforms and controversial indigenization plans, and promising to “lobby” South Africa’s ruling ANC to adopt similar policies, The Standard (4/4) reported Malema as having “strongly denounced the party’s violent tendencies during elections”.

The government-controlled print media initially claimed Malema was on a national visit, saying he was coming “to show solidarity with the people and their fight for full economic independence” and “solidify the cordial relations between Zimbabwean youths and their South African counterparts” (The Herald, 29/3). But subsequently they reported Malema coming as a guest of ZANU PF (The Herald & Sunday Mail , 2, 4, 5 & 6/4).

News that the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Mines and Energy was prevented from visiting Chiadzwa diamond fields on a fact-finding mission by the ZANU PF arm of government was all but censored in the government media. The Sunday Mail (4/4) belatedly carried this news buried in a report about the Zimbabwe Miners Federation’s planned visit to Chiadzwa, which appeared on page 5 of the paper’s business section. The weekly passively cited lack of police clearance as the reason why the MPs were barred without investigating why they were refused this clearance.

Instead, the paper passively quoted ZMF president Trynos Nkomo accusing the parliamentary committee of being “obsessed with Chiadzwa diamonds” when there were other “thorny issues” in the mining industry, adding: “it seems they have an agenda and we would like to know whose agenda they are pushing”.

In related news, ZTV (29/3, 8pm) & The Herald (6/4) reported senior government officials saying that Zimbabwe was “ready” to start selling its diamonds after allegedly complying with the recommendations of the Kimberley Process. Apart from failing to corroborate this with KP monitor Abby Chikane, the official media censored news that British-based African Consolidated Resources (ACR) had advised against the sale until the courts had finalized the ownership dispute between the government and ACR over Chiadzwa (The Financial Gazette, 1/4).

The private media also prominently reported the parliamentary committee being banned from Chiadzwa; cited an “internal report” by Chikane expressing reservations over the presence of “too many state agents” in Chiadzwa, which he said, “increases the risk of theft of the diamonds”; and reported that, contrary to government media reports, Chikane had not yet approved the diamond sale (Studio 7, The Standard & ZimOnline, 1, 2 & 4/4).

The Standard reported the parliamentary team’s surprise over the decision to ban their site visit as it had been approved by the Home Affairs co-ministers. The weekly also quoted unidentified committee members saying they believed the ban was imposed to conceal evidence of corruption in the mining of Chiadzwa’s diamonds and vowing to push for a special committee to investigate Mines Minister Obert Mpofu’s interest in the companies that were awarded mining licenses.

THE MEDIA’S MOST POPULAR VOICES

The government media continued to promote ZANU PF’s views on topical issues compared to its coalition partners, while the private media favoured the Morgan Tsvangirai-led MDC formation.

Although the public media appeared to have extensively quoted foreign voices, most of them were ANC Youth League chairman Julius Malema, who was mostly, quoted praising ZANU PF policies. The government media suffocated the views of independent commentators, which found ample space in the private media where they were quoted interrogating the soundness of Malema’s visit and the implications of his racially inflammatory statements; and criticizing ZANU PF’s black economic empowerment programme, interference in Chiadzwa and resurgent political violence.

MALEMA was the most quoted individual in the public media. He was quoted 18 times. ZANU PF negotiator Patrick Chinamasa (14); Indigenization Minister Saviour Kasukuwere (10); and Affirmative Action Group (AAG) president Supa Mandiwanzira (six) competed fo r attention too. Malema was quoted “throwing weight” behind ZANU PF and attacking “imperialists”, while Chinamasa was accessed for comment on the status of inter-party talks. Kasukuwere and Mandiwanzira were heard defending ZANU PF’s indigenization plans.

South African President Jacob Zuma was the most quoted in the private media (six times). Zuma’s adviser Lindiwe Zulu, Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and Kasukuwere were each quoted three times. Zuma, Zulu and Tsvangirai were quoted commenting on Zimbabwe’s inter-party talks, while Kasukuwere was quoted defending the black empowerment programme as the basis for full economic emancipation.

Fig 2: The most quoted voice in the media