admin
Nick Mangwana
Government Up Close
Zimbabwe successfully hosted the 44th Ordinary Summit of SADC Heads of State and Government over the weekend and boy, what an occasion!
Coming after 10 years, the summit lived up to expectations both in terms of regional interaction and alignment, as well as hospitality.
It was a rare occasion that every professional sought to take advantage of and market their expertise.
A few did stand out but sadly, some of our colleagues in the media sector glaringly fell short, therefore, inadvertently exposed the decline in the standards of journalism in the country.
The other day, I was reading a paper by Tendai Chari in which he wrote that, the social utility of journalism is predicated upon its ability to function as a provider of public knowledge and truthful, comprehensive and intelligent accounts of news and events.
What we consumed in the build-up, over the course of the summit and the immediate aftermath was nothing but the advent of social media and 24-hour news cycles has revolutionised the way we consume information in Zimbabwe. But this has also caused a shift to event-driven reporting where journalists focus on breaking news and instant updates leading to what many observers conclude is a decline in the standards of journalism.
After consuming a media product, one may know what occurred but that would be pretty much it.
There would be no historical context at all leading to the consumer of the media products having a very fragmented understanding of a complex subject.
For example, people that did not live through all the events in the history of SADC may just know about the summit and that a neighbouring leader did not physically attend the event. Naturally, this was sensationally fuelled by journalists playing newsroom commissars for certain interests.
Some of what we were consuming lacked a nuanced analysis and to be blunt, was quite shallow and superficial.
Few journalists gave substantial information, for example, that there are leaders that have a history of not always attending, which may explain their living up to that reputation.
All we got was an over-emphasis on attention grabbing headlines which really perpetuates the culture of sensational journalism. Little analysis on the enduring legacy of such events as this summit.
Few even bothered to unpack the theme of the summit, what it means, who chooses it whether that theme makes a difference at all.
I contend here that one can still deploy critical thinking and breaking news.
One can still do live coverage and still analyse. Instead of endless repetitive reporting, one can still fill airtime with proper researched analyses.
With the advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the requisite research is no longer consuming too much time. Those who do not research are not doing the profession any favours with their laziness.
A lot of commentators have attributed the current poor standards to the rise of social media platforms and their use which has dramatically changed the dynamics of news consumption.
Online news outlets and social media platforms have become the primary sources of information for many, leading to a proliferation of unverified news and a decline in fact-based reporting.
Some argue that the shift has happened in both the consumers of the news product and the producers of the product.
The consumer expects their news in small bytes hitting the highlights very quickly and does not have time or even the attention span to go through reels and reels of written texts or visual analysis. There is probably some credence in that argument.
Indeed, the proliferation of social media has created a culture of instant gratification, where speed is prioritised over accuracy.
Journalists are now under pressure to break news quickly, often sacrificing fact-checking and verification for the sake of being the first.
This has led to a surge in misinformation and disinformation, with far-reaching consequences for the public. But while it is correct to call new technologies, disruptive, the journalism profession must see them as enhancers and not obstacles to ethical practice.
An unverified story remains a lie whether there is disruptive technology or not.
There is also a sinister reason beyond pressure and laziness why the other side is not being given the right of reply or even right to be heard.
Firstly, accuracy is no longer an ethical consideration on whether a story has to be published or not.
Secondly, as political activists and newsroom commissars, journalists are political agenda setters and the other side is not given as an opportunity to be heard as this is considered likely to derail that agenda by what they will say.
Therefore, the agenda at hand is given precedence over all ethical considerations. And these commissars have their ready platforms which they can populate with what boils down to desktop journalism and emotional creative writing.
The rise of online news outlets has also led to a proliferation of partisan reporting.
Many online publications are openly aligned with specific political parties or interests, leading to a decline in objective reporting.
This has created a toxic media environment, where facts are distorted and opinions are presented as news. Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) have become major sponsors of programmes on both television and radios.
A lot of them have their own agendas emanating from whoever their funding authority is.
Media houses are desperate for the greenback in this highly competitive space. Discursive programmes which are meant to be highly educative to society end up being just inciters of civil disobedience under the guise of democracy. Some say the profession has gone to the dogs.
We touched on disruptive technologies in passing earlier on. These have also changed the way journalists work. The rise of citizen journalism has blurred the lines between professional journalists and amateur reporters.
While citizen journalism has its benefits, such as an increase in diversity of voices, crowd sourced reporting (as many mainstream media outlets now give space to verified citizen generated content), it has also led to a proliferation of unverified news and a decline in the standards of reporting.
The infectious lack of accountability in citizen journalists has rubbed off on the professional journalists as the two fight to out scoop each other.
Besides the declining standards, disruptive technologies have spread the financial cake too widely and dwindled the coffers of structured media conglomerates among others creating a financial strain for them.
The economic challenges facing the media industry have further exacerbated the decline in journalism standards.
With advertising revenue declining and online platforms changing the way news is consumed, many media outlets have been forced to cut costs and reduce their workforce.
This has led to a shortage of experienced journalists, further compromising the quality of reporting. And yet universities have not stopped churning out media graduates who now lack mentors and role models.
In Zimbabwe, most experienced journalists have gone into public relations and the civil society space, where their focus is advocacy, leaving very few mentors for the young upstarts in the profession. It is tragic that despite whatever is taught to them in class, there are new batches of journalists that now lack the compulsion to adhere to the ethical canons of the profession which at some point was considered a noble calling. There is a reason why the media is called the Fourth Estate.
This is because it represents a distinct sphere of influence outside the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary.
These three pillars of State can all be held to account by their fourth counterpart.
But that can only happen if journalists uphold values of ethical integrity.
Ethical journalism builds trust because the practitioner has proved that they value accuracy, fairness, transparency and avoid conflicts of interest. But greed and corruption have also reared their ugly heads in journalism affecting the standards.
Journalists as professionals are entrusted with the responsibility of informing the public about those who are corrupt and the dangers of the vice.
But we now have a situation where journalists themselves are very corrupt and now in the hands of the rich and powerful. They now subvert public opinion through ignoring their principals’ corruption and mount public relations (PR) gigs for them including glossy news items which are nothing but advertorials.
Surely, brown envelope journalists cannot be watchdogs for society. And the tacit code in the media of not reporting negatively on each other has led to cartelism and lack of accountability in the sector.
To arrest this decline, urgent action is necessary.
The media industry must take steps to strengthen its own integrity, promoting fact-based reporting and transparency. Online news outlets must be held to the same standards as traditional media, with a focus on accuracy and verification. The industry’s advocates are pushing for a hybrid regulatory regime called co-regulation.
In fact, this is a compromise position with their ideal position being self-regulation. But so far what we are seeing raises a lot of questions on its efficacy as the sector has turned into a jungle. Why do they not show us what they can do with the current powers they have before you ask for more?
The Government will do its best to protect the media industry, including ensuring that journalists are free to report without fear of intimidation or harassment.
We have already proved our bona fides throughout the Second Republic and call on the sector to play its part. This is because journalism has a role in nation building and development.
Let me conclude by saying that there is no contradiction between good journalism and patriotism.
Journalists have a role in promoting national values, reporting and promoting those things that positively impact on the nation’s well-being as well as helping with national security by reporting on those things that threaten it.
There is more to be gained by a journalist celebrating national achievements than always choosing to trash any national milestone.
As President Mnangagwa said, “This is the only Zimbabwe we have; this is our motherland and media practitioners must never sell our birth right for a few pieces of silver.”
Online Reporter