IBA and church mother bodies

WE are not surprised with the stance taken by the three church mother bodies over the suspension of the broadcasting licence of Prime Television. This is because we believe the three church mother bodies have abdicated their right to be regarded as honest brokers in the nation’s affairs. The three church mother bodies comprise the Council of Churches in Zambia, Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia and the Zambia Conference of Catholic Bishops. They represent what are regarded as the mainstream or traditional churches. Prime TV was suspended last week by the Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA) for one month for exhibiting unprofessional elements in its broadcasting. The month-long suspension was announced by IBA board secretary Josephine Mapoma, explaining that the privately-owned television station was broadcasting unbalanced coverage, opinionated news, material likely to incite violence and use of disparaging language. Said Ms Mapoma: “Prime Television has been suspended for exhibiting unprofessional elements in its broadcasting through unbalanced coverage, opinionated news, material likely to incite violence and use of derogatory language.” The three church mother bodies have charged that the suspension by the IBA was hypocritical and undemocratic. They add that the suspension just shows how dead the consciences of those in Government have become. But are the three church mother bodies behaving like honest brokers? We think they are not. They have allowed their political inclinations to cloud their judgement. Just like in the failed national dialogue, the three church mother bodies failed to be honest brokers and decided to take a partisan view by wanting to use dialogue as a means for regime change. We know for a fact that one of the key anchors of Prime TV is a bona fide member of the United Party for National Development (UPND) media team. Its main functions do not need explaining – propping up the UPND, even propagating fake news. But for the three church modies, they need for a start, to differentiate between Government and the IBA. The suspension was effected by the IBA, an independent organisation set up by an Act of Parliament. Its primary duty is to act as a regulatory body for broadcasting houses. The IBA has rules and regulations which broadcasting media follow as part of its regulation process. As part of it function, the IBA for instance promotes broadcasting standards, codes of ethics and practice. There are some sections who want to claim that the suspension of Prime TV was political. We recall however Ms Mapoma explaining that the television station was given a chance to exculpate itself. We think it is wrong to equate Prime TV with the Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation. If ZNBC is found wanting, it too is answerable to the IBA. Zambians ought to make informed decisions on whether they would accept a broadcasting house that decides to throw ethics to the wind, and put the nation at risk. The three church mother bodies in their statement were doing more politicking than analysing the issue. The IBA, we believe, is only carrying out its mandate by reining in those broadcasting houses that think they are not answerable to anyone. Prime TV should stop crying foul when it has failed to respect the rights of those innocent Zambians it continues to berate with reckless abandon. But as political scientist Alex Ng’oma observes, “those siding with Prime Television have their own agenda but any irresponsible media should not be left unchecked as it has a potential to ignite anarchy like in the case of Rwanda.” The IBA should not at the end of the day be accused of being a “toothless bulldog” by failing to take decisive action against erring broadcast houses. Its obligation is to the public and it must not compromise that role so as to be “politically correct.”