Impact of technology on Basic journalistic values

With technological advancement spreading in the world at an enourmous speed and rate, new media has become the heart of the profession of journalism. Though traditional media is still explored, journalists feel a need to move with the times hence the use of new media technologies that is the information communication technologies. However like any other element introduced into this world, new media, though with its positive impact, have presented a challenge to the basic journalistic values that have crippled the profession of journalism causing journalists not to be a trusted source of information. Therefore, this article provides an attempt to address these challenges by exploring the basic journalistic values that have been compromised such as accuracy, relevancy, reliability originality, neutrality, objectivity and balance.

Reliability has been many compromised by the use of pseudo names especially in social networking sites such as face book and twitter. For starters it is within human nature that one finds difficulty in trusting someone or something they cannot name. As a result it becomes difficult for individuals to rely on pseudonyms people as their source of information. To further drive the point home some of the sources using pseudo names have in the past disappointed the people by not disseminating truthful or reliable information. Baba Jukwa, for instance has published some political stories that have not been truthful such as the death of the president.

Speaking on social media practitioners, Green (2010) states that they tend to disseminate information that is not neutral but a reflection of their affiliations in the loci of that topic. This is to say that new media has paved for neutrality to be compromised as bloggers, facebookers, twitter users run a chance of being biased towards one side over the other. As a result this inshrines the basic neutrality demands of the profesion of journalism thereby causing people to lose hope and trust in journalism.

New media has also suppressed the basic journalistic standard of accuracy by giving birth to citizen journalism. This is whereby any citizen assumes the role of a journalist by giving information to the masses through the online media.But the pitfall becomes that not all citizens are responsible and will act accordingly to the demands of journalism ethics. As a result, citizens disseminate information whose facts are shady and inaccurate.This as a result lowers the vibrant nature of the profession of journalism. This can be noted from the Harare based boy who was arrested for disseminating inaccurate information on facebook that the president was dead

According to Reuchlin (2012), journalists have an obligation of showing significance and relevancy of news to the general public. As such any information disseminated to the masses should be of public interest not interesting to the public. However with the emergence of new media so has irrelevant and insignificant information. A debatable issue to show this argument is of the MDC-T leaderMorgan Tsangirai’s sex escapades. Though others argue that he is a public figure and has to be exposed it was however not in the interests of the people or the well-being of the people to publish his dirty laundry considering that there were more pressing issue to be discussed.

Unlike traditional media, new media requires constant publish and updating of stories.This means that journalists also have to fast track the way they do things to meet the demands of new media and to stay abreast. However this has kind of led to journalist posting unfinished stories that present one side of the story.The lack of multi sourcing to be on track has inturn compromised  the value of balance leading to the downgrading of journalsm. Price et al (2011) notes that most of the online media  especially social networks are an ‘instant thing’ where journalists just get a story and publish it with excitement sometimes without even getting the other half of the story. He further explains that new media has perpetuated half baked stories.

To tie the knot, it is with the illustrations and explanations given above that buttress the point that new media has become a strengthening enzyme in  down pulling the profession of journalism. It is the lost ethics such as lack of sourcing and verification and impartiality, in the reportage of matters in the new media that has led to people losing their trust in journalists and or the profession as a whole.

Why there is no development journalism in Zimbabwe

Bonjour mon amies welcome back. Anew day anew beginning and a new topic to discuss about.Last time we discussed l about the extent to which there is development journalism, this time there about l want to explore with you why there is no developmnt journalism in Zimbabwe.Let me rephrase l will look at why development journalism is lacking in Zimbabwe and why it is not the best or most conjusive place to promote or explore development journalism.

Developmentjournalism demands that the media should allow open debate on development enable circulation of diverse opinions and ideas, extend frontiers of freedom to public, further connecting and bridging the gap between government and the public and mobilising the public in support of development agendas. It assigns the media the fourth estate role and echoes the philosophy of the public sphere concept. The above demands are the responsibility of journalists and the media in making sure they are met but however in a nutshell the media fails to promote development journalism due to factors such as commercialisation, ownership and control, gender stereotyping, competition, lack of funds and envelope journalism. 

.

Ownership and control of the media is another factor disturbing the promotion of development journalism. Those who own and control the media are the elite who tend to use the media to push up their political and economic agendas instead of buttressing development communication. Reporters for Government run media such as the Chronicle and Star FM cannot provide checks and balances of the government because no owner can monitor themselves. The private media tried to question the Zimpapers group for rewarding its staff in helping ZANu pf win the elections in July but the private media forgot to monitor itself that the agenda behind this was political and not in the interests of the people. Zimpapers group CEO, Mutasa even argued saying “After all, the so called independent media is not so independent….they stand for foreign interest,” where most of their funding and control originates.

The commercial imperative of the media has also led to journalist killing the reporting of development stories and settling for more marketable leads. Sreshthaputra 2010 calls this opportunity cost of stories ‘the nature of the beast’ where the notion ‘where it bleeds it leads’ is still valid in most media houses. Development journalism is a non-profit driven theory but with most media firms in the industry to make money they find it difficult and irrelevant to run stories that will not generate any income or be money friendly to them. As a result this has led to journalist discarding development journalism or rather skewing development journalism to fit the profit motive. Alpha media holdings for instance is pioneered by the profit driver where only what is reported are stories or advertisements that will increase their bank balance and make sure their sales increase.

Millenniumdevelopment goal number three demands the promotion of gender equality and women empowerment. The idea is that development journalism should be inclusive of women with the gender and development approach arguing that women are agents of change. Mommsen 2004 further argues that development journalism should be inclusive of women if not then it should ‘prepared’, ‘baked’ and ‘distributed’ having included women. However the practical case is that the media is still very masculine saving the needs and interests of male against the notion that development exclusive of women is not development. The questions should come to our minds as we consume development journalism products are: who is talking, are women voices present, are women represented, how are women potrayed.Sadly the answers to all these question are negative hence gender stereotyping is another major issue  enshrining development journalism. In Zimbabwe stories to do with economics and politics are always male dominated with dominant voice and the sources masculine as well as the language and diction which are not gender friendly. In the Chronicle article about the increment of tollgates, there is no evidence of women either participating or having affair share for their voices to be heard. All comments come from a male Dr Obert Mpofu clearly suggesting that the story is not gender sensitive.

Envelopejournalism and corruption also undermines the media’s ability to promote development journalism. A psychologist, Dr Price even argues that everyman has a price and can be bought. This is to say that even journalists can be paid to cover stories in a certain angle or not cover them at all. This is the envelope journalism and corruption where journalists accept bribes and incentives to have a certain angle on a particular story. On the 26^th of October marked a new era where the New express reporter, Chen Young Zhou agreed to accepting bribes of about RMB500000 to report negatively on Zoom lion heavy industry science and technology, China’s second largest manufacturer of construction machinery. This crippled relations between China and their international traders causing the Chinese economy to lose at least RMB 1 400 0000 worth of revenue that could have contributed to the gross domestic product of china.

The legislative system can also cause the disturbance of development journalism. The government may craft draconian and repressive laws to ensure this result.Acccording to Thussu 2006:11 “where independent journalism exists in third world countries, the media’s freedom to critically examine state policies is severely restricted by the government’s indirect editorial control by introducing draconian censorship laws or threatening to stop newsprint supply.” These are mainly applied on the private media that does not necessarily have a bedfellow relationship with the government. In the Gukurahundi era Zimbabwe saw the government put into power the emergency powers declaring places like Tsholotso as no go area to prevent journalists from reporting the atrocities of the government. Even today the documentation on this era is very little with most people not knowing what really was happening during that time

It is with these explanations given above that l rest my case after presenting some of the factors undermining development journalism. As a result what we see to be development journalism is not up to standard and lacking. Furthermore there are other factors that can also lead to the enshrining of development journalism such as advertising pressure and the digital divide.

Development Journalism in Zimbabwe

We meet again fellows but this time on a different matter. l am sure you have all heard about the animal development journalism if not dont worry l will explain it a bit soon. But am not just giving you a lecture on development journalism but as fellow journalism student am giving you my critical thinking of the extent of development journalism in Zimbabwe.Here we go take note we about to venture on the path of development journalism in Zimbabwe

What is lacking in Zimbabwe

Development journalism is the kind of journalism aimed at providing complete, accurate, objective, balanced, fair and diversified information on development for community consumption. It is what we can term layer two or layer three reporting which diverts from the basic layer one reporting which simply require one to report on the facts provided by the source. Instead, following Thussu2006: ‘s definition of development journalism, “this journalism claims to pursue a news agenda different from the mainstream media, steeped in so called ‘coups and earthquakes’ syndrome and investigates the process behind a story rather than merely reporting the news itself.” It therefore seeks to report why something happened, how something happened, the consequences and implications of what happened with the reporter verifying facts and engaging in investigative reporting. Thus giving more depth on the story, comprehensively and fully informing the reader. This however is not widely the case in Zimbabwe with most development stories being reported in a poor manner, diverting from the original demands of development journalism.

Having given you these definitions now lets venture into today's real business.The major issue prevailing in Zimbabwe is how the journalists reduce development stories into just but a mere event. They do not give that punch that priorities development and the motive to improve standards of living in Zimbabwe. They do not provide critical question that show the relevance of the story as a develop journalism story but merely does layer one reporting providing the basic information from the sources. An example is how the media reported on the President donating computers to schools. The masses did not see the implications and the reasons behind that move as the journalists simply embraced that action without questioning further.

Thedigital divide is another problem affecting development journalism. As Gale notes “The issue of reaching the people is problematic in Africa. The rural area makes up by far the greatest portion of Africa, and the infrastructure is non-existent.” Development journalism is supposed to create and support public discussions. These are mainly there in the digital media such as social network sites but they only reach a limited number of people, those in urban areas, neglecting the larger proportion in the rural areas mainly due to the fact that they are not literate to use the internet and some have no computers or network to access the net.

Commercialisation and the surge to make profits have also weakened development journalism in Zimbabwe. Because these media organisation are already in this industry to make money, it has become difficult for journalist to actually deliver sufficiently on development stories. This is to say that the journalists skew the development stories to fit their profit driven motive. Thussu 2006:11 even argues that “In a market driven news environment there is a discrimination against news that cannot be ‘sold’, resulting in a distorted presentation of events to make them more marketable. Alpha media holdings is in the business for profits therefore it cannot settle to cover a development story instead of a juicy story that could make them have more sales. It is just but the concept of profit maximisation and business survival.

Still on the need to generate money, some media organisation may not skew development journalism on choice but due to other forces. To put this into context, development journalism is a non-profit making motive but however it still needs to generate some money as working capital, the daily life blood of business operations. If this working capital is not there then development journalism seizes to exist completely. As a result, without adequate funding, journalists are forced to be dependent on their aiders who mostly turn out to be foreign organisations such as the International monetary fund or advertisers or even the government. The problems emerge from the idea that this funding does not just come but it has some invariably attached strings. Econet being the major advertisers in the Daily news can exert pressure for their advertisement to be published instead of a development story because they fund Daily News in terms of money for advertisement.

a factor affecting Development journalism

According to Mcphail 2002:31, part of the demands of development journalism is to “encourage indigenous media and discourage reproduction of Western media models, which debase or marginalize local and traditional cultures.” Though there have been laws designed to enforce this demand such as the broadcasting services actthat demands 75% local content, promoting local media in taking a larger stand in their local communities, their application however diverts from the development journalism need to pursue and serve the need of the masses. Instead these laws tend to serve the needs of those in power or those owning the means of production as the Marxist theory

argue. Tawanda Hondora 2003:23 even asserts that the “BSA is an instrument testifying to the fear within government. It only serves to allow ZANU pf to churn out propaganda in its efforts to retain political power.” To illustrate this point let’s consider the three journalist from the community radio station Kwelaz who were arrested and charged under contravening the BSA. T

 Inefficient communication seems to be another problem buttressing the insufficient development journalism in Zimbabwe. Ank Linden even points out, “governmental authorities in the third world countries [Zimbabwe inclusive] often seem to be more interested in maintaining the status quo than in strengthening the communication capacity.” With development journalism demanding “the use of communication to promote development and empowerment” [Dralenga 2008:46] it entails that there has to be interactivity, participation and two way communication between the top management [government] and the mass population [the community].This is however not the case with Zimbabwe which seems to adhere to the modernisation paradigm which according to its principles infringes and shrines development journalism. Instead of that interactivity and the two ways communication to be present there is one way communication with the elite exercising the authoritative voice by merely dictating the development that needs to take place instead of the government and the people engaging in talks to pursue the development that the people need and want.

However one could argue that development journalism is pretty sufficient in Zimbabwe. Mcphail 2002 defines development journalism as a media theory that encourages a press committed to government set priorities and objectives whose efforts work in unison to support national goals. In the case of Zimbabwe that is exactly what is happening. The Zimbabwe democratic institute argues that the media so far has help Zimbabwe in achieving the goal to ensure that Zimbabwe’s development trajectory is supported by locally generated information and knowledge

My fellow friends it is with the many few reasons l have discussed above that l argue that our Zimbabwe is truly lacking on developmnet communication/journalism.Our thirst for money among other things does not fully permit us to fully practise development journalism.Till next time when l give more insight on another issue arios amigos.

A critical thought of the Zimbabwe media legislative sytem

he gave birth to AIPPA and POSA

Welcome back freinds.Today l would like to shed light on how the Zimbabwe media legislative sytem has safegurded monopoly in Zimbabwe.It, comprising of laws such as Public Order andSecurity Act[posa],Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act[aippa],ZBC Commercialisation Act and the Broadcasting services act[bsa]  has highly  safeguarded the monopoly of the states’ broadcasting. These laws are effective in doing so by creating the impression that their presence is to advance the media interests and or restrict the dissemination of information genuinely in the interests of the public.

Communication being defined as the activity of conveying information through any medium, POSA bans the communication of statements which can be offensive in certain respects to the Zimbabwean state or the President or which may endanger public order regardless of whether the information is true or false.With this isnt the law depriving the people of Zimbabwe their right to freedom of speech or to criticize the government where they feel its lacking? Are they saying, as the Ndebeles would put it, sifele ngaphakathi njengentambo yekhandlela 

As a result this control of information passage eliminates debate and criticism as one ideology is being spoke out in favor of the president who leads the state. In turn this will entail that whatever the masses are be fed as information is only the fundamental thinking capacity of the state only through the president.

Under this act, it is not clearly stated what is ‘likely to cause alarm and despondency’ within the public.Chiweshe et al [2003] further postulates that “it is difficult to foretell whether a statement is likely to result in public disorder”. Therefore this creates a culture of fear where reporters tend to self-censor themselves and or practice what Geoff Nyarota labeled as sunshine journalism in the early years of independence. As a result what will be broadcast to the public are ideas of the state as the reporters tend to give the public information that the government wants to hear or view but not what the viewers have to know.

The ZBCcommercilisation act further guarded this monopoly as evident from subsection three of the act which states that ZBC, being divided into a signal carrier company and a broadcasting company, “shall give priority to serving the needs of the state” [Chiweshe et al 2003:59].The needs of the state are to instill the hegemony of the government into the people to maintain their power. As a result, this reduces the broadcasting industry to a state apparatus catering for dissemination of the singular based views of the government.it can even be witnessed from the colonial era as a case study where the Rhodesian broadcasting company was state controlled transmitting propaganda and belittling of the citizenship and nation building.

Webster Shamu

According to McQuail [2000] the idea of public service broadcasting is publicly funded and operated in a nonprofit way and required by law to meet various informational needs of all citizens. However due to this act, the Public service broadcasting is change into a profit making organization being funded and controlled by the government. This gives the state too much power to control the broadcast media on what they can and cannot transmit thus potentially serving the needs of the government but not the public as identified by the public broadcaster definition. Thus this limits the ZBC to a state broadcast company.

Another bodyguard to the states’ singular view in broadcasting is the AIPPA through the appointment of the majority of the board members of the Media commission. It requires that the minister of information and publicity appoints the members after consulting the president.With the notion that whoever can appoint can also disappoint, it cannot be ignored that the two prominent people can abuse their power by appointing people who are loyalist to the state’s ruling party. In addition, due to the fear of being disappointed, the appointed will in turn make sure they serve the interests of the appointers by making sure that only their ideologies flourish within the broadcasting sector, killing diversity. An illustration is that of on September 30^th 2009 when minister of information Webster Shamu appointed a new board of directors with Cuthbert Dude as chair ,Doreen Sibanda wife of Misheck Sibanda who was principal secretary to the president and the cabinet as deputy chair and most of the rest of the members being army generals.What can be noted is that almost all members have a link to the majority ruling party meaning ZBC was controlled by the state which comprises of the majority sector being occupied by ZANU-PF.

Furthermore this gave rise to the accreditation of local and foreign journalists as well as media houses whose licenses can be terminated at any time as deemed by the Media Commision.This allows the state to control and monitor who, how and what can be reported. Because this law makes it a crime to report without a license  and journalists need to report to save their fourth estate role and to carter for their basic needs as identified as Abraham Maslow, they tend to oblige to what the needs of the state whom when wronged by promoting diversity or counter hegemonising can terminate their licenses.

In addition this act clearly states that when reporters and journalists apply for information it has to be released by the head of bodies within the government. Take not that when we unveil the veil of ignorance in analyzing this the state is the only body with the authority to release information through the Head of bodies such as Minister of mines Orbert Mpofu, Justice minister Patrick Chinamasa, etc. who are all government axeman.Thus in practice they could manipulate this power granted to them in releasing information for broadcasting by being selective on whom and what they release hence ensuring the watchdog role of a monopoly.

AIPPA also allows the government to suppress the publication or broadcasting of any subversive statement or false story capable of causing alarm and despondency

.The government is granted too much power on the broadcasting of information. As a result we note that if the government can control what can be broadcast they can also use the same power to instill monopolism.

A hater of sunshine journalism

According to the Broadcasting services act of 2000 the Minister of information is the sole broadcast licensing authority[Chiweshe et al 2003:62].This proves problematic as the minister may abuse his power by not granting licenses on vendetta basis or in other context such as ensuring monopolism. Radio dialogue radio station with slogan ‘giving you’re a voice’ has not been granted a broadcast license since 2000 though they have made attempts to apply several times. From their slogan it can be argued that the minister fears the radio station might give rise to diversity through the aim to enable all sections of the Zimbabwean community to engage in aspiring for a well informed and more developed Zimbabwe.

Though it was good move that a statutory body be formed to regulate the broadcasting industry that is the Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe [BAZ], the tight control in flourishing the monopoly was the power awarded to this body to set restrictions on the content of programs to be aired [Media under siege 2002:24].The members of this authority are appointed by the Minister of information which means they tend to be answerable and accountable under the minister for attaining these positions. Thus what they will allow to be disseminated through the radios and the televisions is what the minister tells them to do who in turn is answerable to the president hence a single idea being enforced to the masses.

In light to the economic situation in Zimbabwe, very few Zimbabweans have the funds or finance to establish a broadcasting station with competent enough programmes.Taking advantage of this, the state through the BS act enforced that only Zimbabwean citizens or a body whose controlling interest are held by Zimbabweans are eligible for a license [Chiweshe F G 2003:63].The notion seems to have grown from the poor relations between Zimbabwe and most of the countries. The government is suspicious of what foreign funded or owned broadcast media might disseminate. Thus they ensure the elimination of counter hegemony through the indirect force and limitation of a variety of broadcasting stations. Take for instance the way the government has labeled Studio 7 as a pirate radio station funded and saving the needs of the whites to recapture Zimbabwe in repetition of history as a colony.

Furthermore, under this draconian act only one other national license can be issued to an aspiring broadcaster to provide broadcasting services [Chiweshe FG et al 2003:63].This simply limits the platform of information dissemination to a monopoly state by promotion of one voice and elimination of competition. Critically, Chiweshe et al 20003 even postulate that people are force-fed information which is clearly manipulated to advance the interest of those in charge.

Still under this law, the provision of 75% of all programs content of broadcasting stations based in Zimbabwe being local[Media under siege2002:24], limits what can be produced. The broadcasting industry in Zimbabwe is facing a downfall with very few entertainment companies having the funds to produce programs let alone those of good quality.

However though these laws enforce and protect monopolism of the state’s broadcasting, it is not their literal that grants this monopolism but the way the states’ axe man carry out the provisions of these laws. The only way for these laws to safeguard this monopolism is if the initiators such as Minister of information and the president take the initiative of protecting and instilling their views only to the masses.

In a nutshell, these laws are pregnant with assumption and interpretations which allows the state to effectively prosecute the accused to their advantage. This clearly illustrates the negative attitude of the government towards the concept of broadcast freedom. Generally l argue that there is no political will to create a diverse environment for the press to exercise their duties most effectively. As a result the broadcast media is impartially functioning in the interest of the state for survival.