Maravi

(NEWZIMBABWE) Zimbabwe journos: neocolonial-addled agents

Zimbabwe journos: neocolonial-addled agents
By: Basil Mutoti
Posted: Thursday, September 9, 2010 9:18 pm

THE Government and leadership of Zimbabwe has been under vicious, slanderous and libelous attack by so-called independent media to a point where claims by journalists and the international community that there ought to be a "free and independent" media space in Zimbabwe are meaningless and absurd.

Media should investigate and report correctly; not engage in political activism, if it is to be distinguished from political parties and political pressure groups. Likewise journalists, if they are to be respectable members of society, have to be professional in approach and investigate and find evidence in their reports to back them up.

The sheer ignorance and blatant disregard for facts oftentimes displayed in "independent" Zimbabwean media; makes a mockery of an education system that is said to be one of the best on the African continent.

The onslaught on Zimbabwe has been mainly carried out in the media; with the likes of charlatan and quacky broadcasters like SW Radio literally getting away "with murder"; slandering and engaging in libellous broadcasts that would never see the light of day even in Western newspapers.

Some reporters who could have carved serious careers in broadcasting and journalism, have become part of these "personal" projects and their integrity often compromised to a point of no return.

Zimbabwean "independent media" often gets away with calling people murderers, killers and thieves without backing it up with court decisions.

The journalists in these media houses have sled into the habit of dehumanizing and inferiorizing African leadership at any given opportunity with the hope of getting some award, recognition or some token from Western organisations.

Africa's past was shaped by depredations many of which were caused by the West. Today, that pillaging, plunder and robbery continues unabated; and is encouraged by African journalists. A neocolonized media, often ruled by the power of the dollar (or pound) exacerbates that situation.

African journalists, mainly employed in Western media houses, are the worst kind; they denigrate their own people, do not investigate stories fully and often have preconceived ideas about the nature of political social and economic processes in Africa.

They also have a twisted mindset, and twisted sense of self-worth, which makes them the best agents for the cloying banality of our African culture, ideals and aspirations.

The likes of SW Radio rely on charlatan political commentators like "Dr" John Makumbe and various other ignorant commentators whose motives are incongruent with the processes in the host countries.

Remnants of colonial broadcasters lead these media houses in the host countries and function mainly to perpetuate what residual "white interests" masked as "minority rights".

Take one journalist, Angus Shaw, who reporting on the increase in alcohol consumption in Zimbabwe, writes: "Health authorities (in Zimbabwe|) also are reporting increases in illnesses linked to the consumption of illegal, homemade drinks with a high alcohol content made from potatoes, rags, chemicals, rotting vegetables and sugar."

Such sweeping statements, not backed up by facts, are repeated worldwide by international media houses like The Canadian Press for which Shaw was writing.

Recently, on SW Radio Africa, anti-Zanu PF Zimbabwean political activist who wishes people to think that he is a journalist, Lance Guma, was corrected by Deputy Minister for Women's Affairs, Gender & Community, Jessie Majome, when he tried to present the work of COPAC in some condescending and poisonous way.

Guma had suggested that COPAC was marred by violence to a point of making it an irrelevant institution.

This is only one of the endless number of grossly biased and inaccurate reports on what is really going on in Zimbabwe.

Interestingly, SW Radio's highly biased reports, are repeated elsewhere including by the BBC, who are licensed to report from within Zimbabwe.

The number of BBC reports, interestingly, have been reduced since they were relicensed to broadcast from the country. The lies they peddled for a long time can no longer be sustained now that they have the opportunity to report from within Zimbabwe.

The same goes for the likes of Al Jazeera's Haru Mutasa, who had for some time, exclusive access to reporting from within Zimbabwe.

These people cannot tell lies for long as Zimbabwean people wise up to this kind of poisonous reportage; which completely ignores, but exacerbates the effects of the illegal sanctions on Zimbabwe.

This way of reporting is characteristic of many so-called journalists who have left the country; and the so-called "political commentators" who have no idea of the subject matter they comment on. They are highly partisan and lost in gutters of neocolonialism.

As long as Zimbabwe is under Western attack, the state media in the country has to adopt a vanguard approach. The "soft touch" approach is not proportional to the myriad of vicious, ignorant and slanderous reports we read about daily.

If Cuba did not have a vigilant state media; like Juventud Rebelde, the effects of the century long embargo on that country would have been more disastrous.

This self-inferiorisation by African journalists has to be met by a proportional response from state media; and their eagerness to publicise Westernism has to be attacked back; if Africa is to self-determine.

Reports from the West about the West are in direct contrast to this gutter journalism by African journalists. CNN, BBC, SkyNews, etc glorify the West and undermine Africa. They are an extension of the policies of Governments of their respective countries, in as far as international branding of their countries is concerned.

These "journalists" who accept crumbs, scrambling for crumby awards and recognition, should be exposed. Where they slander, they should be brought before the courts.

This is not, in any way, an attempt to restrict press freedom.

Press freedom should not be tantamount to slander and it is not synonymous with illegal activity.

So-called independent press should abide by journalistic principles and its reporting should be above board and exemplary.

Independence is not a ticket to say anything. It should be accompanied by responsibility; not by charlatanism.

Labels: INTERNATIONAL MEDIA, NEOCOLONIALISM, PROPAGANDA

posted by MrK @ 1:59 AM