|
|
|
|
| Features |
| Talking back to the media |
|
by
Herbert Chandilanga, 05 May 2006
-
06:31:01
|
Today, buying a newspaper or tuning in to a radio station to get news updates is a regular on most households’ list of priorities. The symbiotic relationship between the media and their audience has shown that until there is an audience to appreciate and critique their products, the media cannot be there.
From the period before the country’s attainment of democracy, the media have played their traditional roles of educating, informing and entertaining their audience.
The audience too has influenced the direction and quality of media products by giving the media feedback on their work.
As democracy dawned on the country, the issue of media freedom was a top item on the national political agenda. The argument was that unless the media are given the freedom to operate, they would not be able to fulfil their obligation of providing quality information to their audience, a critical element in the progress of the democratic process.
Over 10 years down the democratic road, there is talk in some quarters that instead of making them responsible, democracy has been a curse to the country’s media. Some people will tell you that the media in Malawi are unnecessarily sensational. Others will say journalists in the country thrive on falsehood and negative reporting.
Does this mean democracy has made the country’s media worse than they were before the new era came?
Pritchard Mwangonde of Kanjedza in Blantyre says democracy has helped the country’s media to notch some notable strides in their work.
“It is good to see the media reporting stories that are revealing. These are stories that would never have been done in the days before democracy,” he says.
Mwangonde notes that the media are increasingly becoming more responsible and “are trying their best to give readers what they demand.”
Herbert Kaipa, a resident of Lilongwe, agrees with Mwangonde that the coming of democracy has helped the media in the country to take a huge leap in the practice of their trade.
“This is in terms of the emergence of many media institutions. Previously, there were a few media institutions which did not cover many issues. Now we have a variety of information because of the many organisations that are there. This is good for people’s reading and listening tastes,” observes Kaipa.
Like Mwangonde, Kaipa says the media have also improved in their approach to issues that no one could dare cover in the pre-democracy days.
“We now have the much-needed diversity because almost anything can be covered. I don’t know whether the change in media approach to issues is a direct product of democracy or that it’s a natural change that had to come anyway, democracy or not,” wonders Kaipa.
MacKinly Kombezi of Mulanje says “the media have become more than 75 percent responsible in the way they cover issues.”
“The other 25 percent is taken away from the industry by some sectors that still oppress journalists. An example is when the authorities try to muzzle the media on stories that make good reading, like arresting journalists for writing about ghosts at the presidential palace. That is unfortunate,” says Kombezi.
However, Kombezi does not spare the rod on the scribes.
“Of late, the problem has been lack of accuracy. Journalists seem to work in a hurry and, consequently, miss a lot of substance. That is why you see a lot of refutals and retractions,” he charges.
Mwangonde again.
“This means something is not being done correctly somewhere. It makes me wonder whether the journalists’ focus is on making money and caring less about what consequences a retraction might cost tomorrow,” says Mwangonde.
He is quick to say that “many stories are given a more sensational touch in order to sound good and sell easily. But this is not good at all and would only expose journalists to otherwise avoidable lawsuits.”
Kaipa bemoans what he calls poor coverage of some issues. He says the media should cut on politics and cover a wide range of issues like health, agriculture, population growth, environment and economic growth, among many others.
“Maybe it’s us the audience that demand politics at the expense of other important issues, but the media need to broaden their focus and tackle other important issues as well. We need well researched statistics on health, population and the general welfare of the people,” says Kaipa.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
