By Dr Parkie Mbozi
IN LAST week’s article I elaborated the traditional functions of the mass media from normative and functionalist perspectives and how the media’s effective execution of these two functions will be crucial as Zambia goes to the polls this year. I further elaborated that an ‘ideal media’ will be crucial to ensuring that the 2021 elections are transparent, free and fair. The question is, how do we get the ‘ideal media’, that is judged as free, independent and, above all, ethical or professional during the elections and, more importantly, beyond August 2021?
The answer to this question, in my strongest of views, is going back to the drawing board, to the basics. That means another round of comprehensive media reforms, akin to the post-1991 reforms that the nation embarked on at the dawn of multiparty democracy under the Third Republic. The reforms culminated in very progressive pieces of legislation relating to freedom, independence and professionalism of the media, especially the public media, Sadly, the laws have either been amended or not actualized altogether to date, by successive self-serving regimes. We are back where we were before 1991. The behaviour of the public media, for instance, is not any different from what obtained under the one-party UNIP regime and this needs to be corrected as a matter of urgency by the next government.
For starters, let’s look at what we mean by free, independent and professional media – what I am calling the ‘ideal media’. For each of three benchmarks, I will articulate what the ‘Founding Fathers’ of the Third Republic Media reforms foresaw and how they dealt with it.
Media or Press Freedom: a free press is one that can execute its functions unhindered within the bounds of the law and professional code of ethics. Article 20 of the 2016 Constitution of Zambia provides for express freedom of expression and the press as follows:
“Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, that is to say, freedom to hold opinions without interference, freedom to receive ideas and information without interference, freedom to impart and communicate ideas and information without interference, whether the communication be to the public generally or to any person or class of persons, and freedom from interference with his correspondence.”
The ‘Founding Fathers’ of the Third Republic Media reforms sought to guarantee that the media or press would have freedom to access information of a public nature by introducing the Freedom of Information Bill of 2002. This was in line with the international trends. For instance, ….African countries have enacted an access to information law of one form or another.
Sadly, for Zambia, the Bill remains just that: a Bill. Successive regimes have promised but failed to turn the Bill into law. The post-Mwanawasa MMD took it to Parliament but withdrew it at the last minute. The post-Sata PF has adulterated it to make it user-friendly for them. Its new contents are yet to be made public and the revised Bill is unlikely to head to Parliament before the 2021 elections. In spite of the explicit provisions for freedom of the press and expression, however, Zambian media houses and journalists face various restrictions under criminal, civil defamation, sedition and obscenity laws and provisions of the penal code, including the State Security Act.
The way forward is to take the Bill, in its original (2002) form, to Parliament for actualisation.
Media independence: is the next benchmark of the ‘ideal media’. Media independence relates to the media-state relations. In general terms, independence refers to an absence of any external control, particularly from the state. It denotes freedom from the external influence but also the capacity media institutions to make their decisions and act ONLY according to their own logic. One scholars writes that, “It is closely intertwined with other basic ideals of the liberal-democratic understanding of media’s role in society, such as freedom of the press, critique of power, media as the ‘fourth estate’ and journalists’ watchdog role.”
Media that permit influence of external forces in their editorial decision-making therefore compromise their ethical and professional obligations of being objective, fair, balanced, impartial, truthful etc. Ultimately, they forfeit their position as the ‘fourth estate’ and watchdogs of society, especially of the Party in power. Traditionally media independence applies to how the state controls the public media. However, in the Zambian context there has been a growing trend of private media that choose to be appendages and (we can say) partners with the ruling party. Such media cast aside ethical standards for the sake of political expediency. The state also controls the media through regulations and control over issuance of licences in the case of radio and television.
The ‘Founding Fathers’ of the Third Republic Media reforms sought to guarantee independence of the Zambian media through by enacting the ZNBC Act of 2002 (specifically for ZNBC) and the Independent Broadcasting Authority Act of 2002. Both the ZNBC Act and the IBA Act were intended to forestall independence of the two institutions. This was to be attained primarily by appointing Boards through competitive processes and independent adhoc appointments committees drawn from institutions such as LAZ, religious organisations, human rights organizations, NGOs etc. Article 4A(1) of the 2002 ZNBC Act reads, “The functions of an appointments committee shall be— (a) to invite applications from persons with such qualifications as may be specified for appointment to the Board.”
The principle of inclusive, free and fair coverage was enshrined in the ZNBC Act of 2002. Section 7 of the Act spelt out the functions of ZNBC. The relevant sub-sections read, 7. (1) (a) provide varied and balanced programming for ALL sections of the populations; (b) serve the PUBLIC INTEREST; (e) contribute to the development of FREE and informed opinions and as such, constitute an important element of the democratic process; (f) reflect, as COMPREHENSIVELY as possible, the range of opinions and political, philosophical, religious, scientific, and artistic trends.
However, the 2002 ZNBC Act was amended to allow the Minister to appoint the Board. Critics have drawn attention to political interference in the operations of the ZNBC specifically, skewing its broadcasting to favour ruling party sources. Speaking on “Let The People Talk’ programme on Radio Phoenix on 10th March 2019, Chanda Kasolo, then MIBS Permanent Secretary, seemed so embarrassed by ZNBC’s naked biased and unprofessional coverage that he had to publicly rebuke the station.
He said, “I was there two days ago. I was speaking to the Director of Programmes and also my good friend who runs the Sunday Interview Mr. Zulu (Grevazio) and I said to them, it’s about time we started improving our outlook and image of ZNBC. We must allow the opposition to come on certain programmes and also out their views. We must allow debate between opposition and ruling party MPs and Ministers. And I know that my honourable Minister (Dora) Siliya is very keen that we do that. We discussed at length.”
In Confirming ZNBC’s loss of one key media principle – credibility -Kasolo further said, “We need to bring back ZNBC to where it was a trusted source. At the moment everyone is suspicious of them. They are looking at them and saying, ‘no they are biased.” He was fired sooner than his directive could see the light of day.
The IBA Act went through a similar fate as the ZNBC Act. The original Act provided for an ad hoc committee of independent organisations that would appoint the members of the IBA Board. The independently constituted Board would be the one issuing TV and radio licenses and regulating their operations. Unfortunately, the whole section relating to appointment of the Ad Hoc committee was removed by 2010 Amendment initiated by the MMD government. It was replaced with Section (2) that reads, The Board shall consist of nine part-time members appointed by the Minister.
This amendment is the genesis of the political interference and biased decisions (real or perceived) of the IBA. For instance, soon after taking power in 2011, the PF government appointed a Director-General for the ‘Independent’ Broadcasting Authority (IBA) in the absence of a board of directors. Similarly, the minister appointed heads of the state-owned media in the absence of boards of directors. Such developments confirm the cancer of political interference facing the public media and broadcasting industry in general resulting from amending the original IBA Act.
In 2017 the PF government introduced a clause that was never there before, which impels the IBA to collect TV levies on behalf of ZNBC, a key player in the industry. Isn’t this akin to the referee and a player wearing the same jersey and scoring in the same goal post? Allegations of impartiality in handling affairs of the broadcasting industry by the government constituted IBA is not an academic disposition. In real life some private TV and radio stations have faced closures and/or suspensions by the IBA, while ZNBC gets away with similar transgressions such as airing hate speeches of PF officials. To date Prime TV remains closed on what many believe are flimsy grounds.
The way forward after August 2021 is restore the IBA Act and ZNBC Act to their original (2002) form. Similar legislation should be introduced pertaining to how the print media and the Zambia News and Information Services (ZANIS) should be independently managed.
Media Professionalism: this benchmark of an ‘ideal media’ can be described as one that sticks to professional ethics and a highly skilled one. The ethics are enshrined in Codes of Ethics of self-regulatory bodies (Media Councils) or Press Ombudsmen, wherever they exist world-wide.The key principles are: fairness, objectivity, accuracy, balance, truthfulness, impartiality and factual.
The ‘Founding Fathers’ of the Third Republic Media reforms sought to guarantee media professionalism in Zambia through self as apposed to state regulation. However, every self-regulation mechanism that has been put in place since 1991 has fallen flat due to disagreements and polarization within the media sector. From Media Council of Zambia (MECOZ) to Zambia Media Council (ZAMEC), nothing has worked.
As a way forward on media regulation, it is logical to suggest for a hybrid mechanism that revolves around a legally constituted entity that ‘self-regulates’ the media. However, once the law is in place, the state should have no role in how this body is constituted, conducts its business and how it determines who its members are. Lessons are there in the SADC region and in the local legal and medical disciplines to learn from.
To conclude, for the nation to enjoy the benefits of free, independent, and professional media, a fresh start is needed after August 2021. There is absolutely no need to re-invent the wheel. The original IBA Act of 2002, ZNBC Act of 2002 and the Freedom of Information Bill.
.
Hi Parkie, nail on the head as usual. This article is timely, unfrotubately, parliament is closed, and we can only hope for a change of government in order to actualize free and independent media. I reckon you wrote this before Muvi Tv was summoned for ‘failure to uphold proffesional standards’ when they featured Tayali and did what media should do, ask questions.
We have had several media houses warned for hosting opposition, inlcuding people like Mulyokela. The situation is laughable in Zambia, but also concerning. Our online space has been gagged by the cyberbill and now independent media is slowing running out of breath.
A change of government is what is needed.
Without the corrupt PF government in power nothing will change. It remains to be seen whether HH will have a different viewpoint. Once in power governments tend to like a subdued press.
“The behaviour of the public media … is not any different from what obtained under the one-party UNIP regime” is not an accurate statement. Private media houses are doing a commendable job in providing checks and balances to public media. The public media is also fully aware of the need to remain relevant to the diverse groups of viewers and audiences. Autonomy of Information needs to be placed in context. For fragile young democracies, it is suicidal to open state secrets to the public Even in certain developed nations, access to certain forms of classified information becomes permissible only after some years have elapsed.
Lazy Lungu is too insecure and a coward for a free press of Mwanawasa and RB.
The truth is that there is NO free media anywhere in the world. All are restricted to the editorial policy of the one who pays the piper. The British Broadcasting Corporation is the closest there is to a free media BUT it still panders to the House of Windsor. If you have anti-monarch views, you will not be freely covered by the BBC. The BBC appears to be impartial but it is not. So, what we need is that every media organisation should be free to report and comment on the news at it feels. We need the media houses to balance each other out- like CNN versus Fox, The UK Guardian vs The UK Telegraph. Let the people decide who to read. What we do not want is monopoly.
Zambian media is free. You write all nonsense, including building image of your the worst human Pimp Nkandu Luo.
Charles, one like from me. You are right to say there is an inherent bias in media. However, I feel you misunderstood the word free in this context. Free doesn’t mean impartial.
Free simply means to be able to do what you want as a media house.
Free means allowing Prime TV to criticize the government and not be harassed, we are now seeing this being done to Muvi TV, being threatened for hosting Chilufya Tayali.
That is not free. We are taking away the freedoms from the media when we do so.
Similarly, independent means no excessive control by the government, Parkie has done a good job to argue about the continued lack of independence and gives the example of government having content control by way of the IBA.
German Media, Finnish Media as well as New Zealand media are very free…
Continued
… as are all Nordic countries. Your example of one of the best in terms of Media Freedoms is all the way at number 33 on World Press Freedom. The UK is not a good example.
It is further right after South Africa.
Zambia, for comparison, is all the way at 115.
It will take good and noble leadership like that of Mwanawasa.
Glorification of criminal conduct is unethical. It could encourage the youth to commit crime. That s the reason why certain personalities can not be remitted to steal the limelight. The appearances and resonance need to be acceptable for ordinary viewers. When the image is frightening or pompous, then it becomes unethical to appear on prime time promoting indecent behavior. Take time to attack your IBA. Take time to build your free press. Take time to uphold rule of law and respect of human rights.
Media Freedom is an integral part of “The Zambia we want “. This change is impossible if ECL and PF remains in Power. ECL has no respect for the Republican Constitution, Rule of Law, Good Governance and Human Rights . The only way is to elect HH and UPND Alliance on August 12. Since ECL to retain Power is relying on Rigging the 2021 Elections in his and PF favour Voters will have to put their lives on the line to protect the Vote. The appetite for a Change of Govt is very high. People are anxious to send ECL and PF “ku wire” on August 12. HH aka Bally will fix it.
You just need to have guts and follow through stories. Enough of hero worshiping public servants. We need to be tough on crime and bring back sanity to the country.
THE CROWDS ARE NOW SHOWING THEIR FACES
BYE BYE P_FF YOUR TIME IS UP AT LAST
Parkie you have left out an important element affecting Zambian journalism since the advent of the Third Republic. Turncoat journalists who act differently when writing stories and then become something else when elected or nominated into political positions. Amos Malupenga, Dora siliya, Josephine Mapoma, Richard Sakala, Dickson Jere are examples of sellouts to the cause of freedom of expression. The IBA is as at present illegal
“The Board shall consist of nine part-time members appointed by the Minister.” goes against our constitution and the IBA should have been challeged in court for this. Its a pity we have weak opposition parties and we can only rely on sparse courageous lawyers like John Sangwa
MEDIA DOESN’T WIN ELECTIONS, MAJORITY VOTES AND PEOPLE VOTING DOES.
KZ, 2021
This Article is very basic for what reforms Zambia needs in the media industry.
Firstly we need independent media bodies that are regulated and are not funded by any government source.
i thought the writer of this piece would have looked at the issue of IBA not being answerable to the government.
My opinion your Article is partisan not articulated with modern solutions.
This is basic college written journalism next time do a global research.
FREE PRESS IN AFRICA HA HA HA
ONLY IN SOUTH AFRICA AT THE MOMENT