The private media were not consumed by the independence euphoria reflected in the public media and focused instead on human rights issues among other topics.

However, both the government and private media brought a new dimension to the week by publicizing fresh indicators of socio-economic stress such as “soaring” inflation, poor wages, persistent water and electricity shortages, and an increase in the number of people succumbing to communicable diseases.

Fig 1: Topical issues in the media

War of words over fate of indigenization

The haggling and confusion over power sharing between the coalition partners was reflected in the media’s coverage on the status of the controversial indigenization regulations.

While the government media relied on ZANU PF sources and their allies, such as the Affirmative Action Group (AAG), to reinforce the message from Economic Empowerment Minister, Saviour Kasukuwere, that there would be no significant changes to the regulations, they ignored reports from the Prime Minister’s office stating that Cabinet had agreed to their revision to avoid damaging the economy. This news only appeared in the private media, while the public media only reported it in the context of ZANU PF government officials disparaging the MDC­T and denying the substance of any such an agreement.

Apart from failing to view this as evidence of a sharp policy and ideological conflict between the two arms of government, the official media continued to promote the indigenization policy as a panacea for economic growth despite evident negative repercussions for the economy.

The Herald’s headline story: 51 pc law stays: President Mugabe (15/4) quoted Mugabe insisting that government would not nullify the regulations and would instead “continue driving for the equitable distribution of Zimbabwe’s wealth”. Mugabe emphasized that government would only accept changes that would “improve” the regulations and not those that change their “substance”. The paper reported Mugabe’s comments as being a rebuke to “MDC-T functionaries” such as Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s office Gorden Moyo and the PM’s spokesman James Maridadi who had been widely quoted in the private online media saying government had “nullified” the regulations. The following day (16/4), The Herald quoted Indigenization board member and legal adviser, Farai Mutangamira, vilifying statements by the PM’s office on the grounds that they were issued by “people” who had “no authority to comment on Cabinet issues” and were a “deliberate attempt to create confusion”. The Herald (15 & 16) also portrayed the MDC-T’s desire to have the regulations amended as unwarranted as most foreign-owned companies were willing to comply with them as evidenced by the “rush” by over “over 100 companies” to submit proposals indicating how they intended to “cede” 51 percent of their shareholding to indigenous Zimbabweans before the expiry of the April 15 deadline.

The private media maintained that the ZANU PF component of government had agreed to wholesale changes to the regulations despite its hard-line public stance, citing unnamed sources and the PM’s office.

These sources reiterated that Cabinet had suspended the implementation of the controversial regulations and postponed the deadline for companies to submit their proposals to pave the way for the amendment of at least 10 clauses in the regulations (SW Radio Africa, Studio 7, ZimOnline & The Standard, 14, 15 & 18/4). SW Radio Africa (14/4) quoted economist Tony Hawkins arguing that conflicting statements by the two arms of government were a reflection of sharp divisions in the coalition. The Zimbabwean On Sunday (18/4) reported that Zimbabwe had lost more than US$100 million in foreign capital since the promulgation of the regulations.

Reports reveal a stressed nation

All the media reported Finance Minister Tendai Biti’s statement on April 15 indicating government’s intention to revise the 2010 national budget following donors’ reluctance to fund it (The Herald & Zimbabwe Independent, 16/4). But the government media didn’t emphasize Biti’s anxiety over “building inflationary pressures” in the economy that he said might lead to 10% inflation by year-end. The Herald reported a “marginal” cost of living increase in its business section (14/4) and selectively quoted Biti (16/4) attributing the inflationary increase to “speculative behaviour” by industry while suffocating other drivers of inflation identified by Biti.

Details of these appeared in the Independent under the heading ‘Inflation surges’ and quoted the Finance Minister identifying lack of fiscal space, an unsustainably high wage bill and employment costs, lack of investment in power generation, water and infrastructural rehabilitation, problems in the financial sector, and a deteriorating balance of payments as the major causes for the increase, which reflected a declining negative value from minus 7.7% in December 2009 to minus 4,8% in March.

Meanwhile, The Zimbabwean On Sunday quoted Education Minister David Coltart reiterating that government’s failure to fulfil the terms of the power-sharing agreement was the main reason why donors were unwilling to support Zimbabwe. He revealed: “Donors have told me that this country is a bottomless pit and they will not support anything until the GPA is fully implemented. They will not give us a cent even for teachers’ salaries...”

All the media highlighted other indicators of socio-economic stress, such as poor wages and labour discontent (The Herald, 17/4); spreading cholera and measles epidemics (The Herald, Sunday Mail & Zimbabwean On Sunday , 14, 16 & 18/4); worsening water and power outages (The Herald & Studio 7, 13/4); food shortages (The Herald & Sunday Mail, 16 & 18/4) and deteriorating education standards (Sunday Mail & Zimbabwean On Sunday).

Independence stories flood state media

The government media gave widespread publicity to Zimbabwe’s independence anniversary. Of their 143 reports on the subject, 110 (80%) of them appeared on ZBC and the remaining 33 in the government papers. Sixteen of the government papers’ reports were news stories, news features (four), comments (six); opinion pieces (six) and the full text of President Mugabe’s speech (one).

These media mostly attributed the benefits of Zimbabwe’s independence to ZANU PF policies, such as land reforms and black economic empowerment.

ZBC suspended normal day programming to broadcast live independence celebrations at the National Sports Stadium, including Mugabe’s 36-minute speech. His speech addressed various national issues, such as power sharing, drought, road accidents, constitution making, and national reconciliation, the economy, land reform and indigenization.

Inevitably, The Herald (19/4) gave front-page lead status to the speech and reproduced it in full in its inner pages without any sensible analysis.

The private media reported Zimbabweans as having had little to cheer about on Independence Day as they continued to suffer many problems such as state sponsored violence, economic collapse, and starvation (SW Radio Africa, Studio 7, ZimOnline & Zimbabwean On Sunday , 15, 17 & 18/4).

Although the government media’s sourcing appeared to reflect the diversity of Zimbabwean citizens, they mostly reported independence celebrations from the perspective of politicians. This was reflected by the domination of government voices and those of the three coalition parties in the official media. They were heard urging Zimbabweans to be united, desist from political violence, and defend the alleged gains of independence, such as the land reform and black economic empowerment programmes. Views of those outside government and the political parties such as traditional leaders, political commentators, artists and ordinary Zimbabweans were mostly quoted endorsing these policies. Notably, half of the 18 voices of ordinary people belonged to schoolchildren.

The private media did not sufficiently cover politicians’ voices, but they publicized the views of analysts and civic organizations arguing that ongoing socio-political and economic problems dampened independence celebrations.

Fig 2: The most quoted voices on independence