Maravi

Things should be called by their names

Things should be called by their names
By Editor
Thursday July 17, 2008 [04:00]

IT is sad that the topmost leadership of the Media Council of Zambia (MECOZ) can pass absolute judgements on issues or processes they don't fully understand. In life, it is better to be clear about things. And as a strict rule, we should always avoid to make comments or pass judgement on processes we don't understand well.

We were shocked yesterday to hear the chairperson of MECOZ Sr Rose Nyondo and the executive secretary Binwell Mwale say that words like jackal, hyena, idiot and so on and so forth should never appear in our media because they are not only libellous but they are also not in line with our culture. Sr Nyondo says, "...even in our own tradition as Zambians, if I call you a mbuzi (goat), I have insulted you.

It's an issue. We cannot accept that. That is against our morality, it's against our ethical issues, it's libel, it's defamation and it's everything negative that you can think about. Those words are not allowed on any radio station or any newspaper". And Mwale says "names like jackals, imbecile, hyenas, stupid and so forth have no place in the journalism language".

We don't know what culture they are talking about because both our traditional and religious culture use such words to describe certain behaviour. In most of the Zambian languages, animals are used to describe certain behaviour. For instance in Lozi, a greedy person is usually described as Munguli, meaning ‘hyena’. He is also sometimes described as a kwena ya mutu - crocodile.

Even in the Bemba language chimbwi, hyena, is a common word used to describe similar behaviour. And a shrewd person is usually described as a shakame, kalulu - a hare. So what culture are these people talking about?

In the Bible, which Sr Nyondo should be very familiar with, Jesus made some very strong charges towards the Pharisees and called Herod a fox. Again, what is unreligious about calling someone who behaves like a fox a fox, a jackal a jackal, a hyena a hyena, a scoundrel a scoundrel?

What is important is that there must be very good justification to call someone a fox, a jackal, a hyena, a scoundrel, an idiot, a fool. One must be able to demonstrate that the behaviour of that person befits that description.

And Sr Nyondo should also be aware that to insult someone does not always amount to libelling that person. She needs to do a bit more work and understand what constitutes libel before she can start trying to school anyone on this score. What she exhibited was total ignorance of the law of defamation. And what does she mean by this being against our morality? What morality is she talking about? If the Holy Bible - the standard bearer of the highest morals - uses such words, it contains words such as foolish and in it Jesus is quoted as calling a king a fox, what morality is Sr Nyondo talking about?

This is the shallowness we find about MECOZ and we are not in a position to subject ourselves to such bankruptcy because it may just inhibit the development of the media in our country.

Anyway Proverbs 18:2 tells us: "A fool does not care whether he understands a thing or not; all he wants to do is show how smart he is." And adds: "If you know what you are talking about, you have something more valuable than gold or jewels" (Proverbs 20:15).

In this world, things are complicated and are decided by many factors. We should look at issues from different aspects, not from just one. In approaching an issue, one should see the whole as well as the past. A frog in a well says, "The sky is no bigger than the mouth of the well." That is untrue, for the sky is not just the size of the mouth of the well. If it said, "A part of the sky is the size of the mouth of the well", that would be true, for it tallies with the facts.

If someone acts in a foolish or stupid manner, he deserves to be called a fool. Honesty demands that things are called by their names.
We pay a lot of attention to criticism; we do not fear criticism because in all that we do, our goal is to get to the truth, we seek the truth. We fear no gibes and we are always ready to listen to other people's views and suggestions. Taught by mistakes and setbacks, we have become wiser and handle our affairs better.

It's hard for anyone to avoid mistakes, but we try to make as few as possible. And once we make mistakes, we try to correct them as quickly and as thoroughly as possible. If we have shortcomings, we are not afraid to have them pointed out and criticised, because we serve the people. Anyone, no matter who, may point out our shortcomings. If they are right, we will correct them. If what they propose will benefit the people, we will act upon it. But we will not accept to be led by people who know far much little than we do about journalism, people who can't even write a page. We take a lot of time to re-examine our work in a very self-critical manner, checking to see whether or not what we wrote was correct and the words we used correctly explained the behaviour or conduct of our subjects, whether or not we let ourselves be carried away, whether or not emotion had anything to do with it.

But if this is the way MECOZ looks at issues, then The Post is very justified in refusing to subject itself to this mediocrity. And people shouldn't think just simply because they are in MECOZ and we are not, then they are better champions of press freedom than us. Which newspaper or media organisation in this country has advanced and defended press freedom than The Post? Which media organisation in this country spends more of its resources trying to improve the quality of journalism, not only for its own staff, but even for other sister institutions? The answer is a categorical none. We are not in anyway claiming that we know it all.

We still have a lot to learn and we are learning everyday. And journalism is not static; it's creatively being advanced every day. We believe in plurality. As Mao Tse Tung once said: "Let a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend." We think that it is harmful to the growth of our media if administrative measures are used to impose one particular style of journalism on everyone. As long as people can keep within particular limits, and in tune with the taste of the community they serve, let them do their own thing. Of course there should be legal recourse for those who feel offended or injured by others.

And the leadership of MECOZ should realise that over the last 17 years, we have introduced new practices which were not there in the Zambian media, things which people thought could not be done but today so many people are benefiting from our creativity and courage. We will continually work to improve our work but we will always refuse to be dictated to by empty heads that produce nothing other than trying to belittle those who graft. We are not novices, we have highly experienced journalists with wide knowledge in many fields

Labels: MECOZ, MEDIA

posted by MrK @ 4:01 AM