Mugabe casts his vote
Mainstream media displaced in countdown to Zimbabwe’s general election, writes Farooq Ronnie Shumba
THE two main rivals in Zimbabwe’s pivotal elections cast their ballots in a peaceful and, at times, jubilant vote yesterday, the first since long-time president Robert Mugabe was ousted.
Mugabe, the country’s independence leader, also turned out to vote despite not running as a candidate for the first time in four decades, and after suggesting he would support the opposition.
The polls were calm yesterday, with voters saying they were hoping for a better future for the southern African country, which under Mugabe became known for economic malaise and human rights abuses.
While 23 candidates are running for president, only two stand a chance: 40-year-old Nelson Chamisa, a Christian pastor; and 75-year-old Emmerson Mnangagwa, Mugabe’s long-time comrade-turned-foe and successor, after November’s military coup.
It looks to be a tight race, with a poll last week showing Mnangagwa – a wily political operator known as “The Crocodile” – leading by three percentage points.
Chamisa cast his vote amid great fanfare, at a school in the high-density Harare suburb of Kuwadzana.
He dismissed a recent attack by Mnangagwa, who said late Sunday that a vote for Chamisa would effectively be a vote for the now widely reviled Mugabe.
Mugabe – for decades synonymous with the ruling ZanuPF party – made the shock announcement on the eve of the polls that he would not be voting for his party, and instead praised Chamisa.
Mnangagwa used Mugabe’s comments to later attack his MDC rival, saying that “you either vote for Mugabe under the guise of Chamisa, or you vote for a new Zimbabwe under my leadership”.
Association with the Mugabe family is a poisoned political chalice in this race.
Chamisa dismissed Mnangagwa’s slur as he cast his vote in the morning.
“I’m not interested in that, we will win this election,” Chamisa said after voting, as crowds of supporters ululated, danced and chanted his name.
Mnangagwa, meanwhile, voted in the town of Kwekwe, a few hours outside Harare, posting a photo on Twitter of himself – wearing his trademark brightly coloured Zimbabwean scarf – with the caption “celebrating Zimbabwean democracy”.
“The voice of the people is the voice of God,” he tweeted.
But all eyes were on Mugabe as he silently entered a polling booth, his wife Grace saying she was feeling “very good” about the vote and flashing the open palm hand gesture of the opposition.
There were long lines of people waiting to vote at one polling station in a poor neighbourhood of the capital.
Children played outside as they waited for their parents to vote, while minibuses bearing names such as “God Bless” on the back ferried voters to the polls on potholed roads.
The atmosphere was jovial, with Zimbabweans of all ages waiting to have their say on the future of a country that is in dire financial straits.
“We want things to change for the better. We want a great change in Zimbabwe,” said Miriam Mundaringisa, a 38-year-old accountant.
“The change started in November, and we want to complete the cycle. I’m voting for Chamisa because I need a new Zimbabwe, not false promises from Mnangagwa,” she added. – dpa
TWITTER and Facebook wars are intrinsic to the build-up to the Zimbabwean general election. The so-called Varakashi (supporters of Emmerson Mnangagwa), Nerrorists (Nelson Chamisa loyalists) and general progressive forces driven by the national interest have been a development to behold in this election season.
Twitter, as a medium of politics, has become very influential and recent studies have shown that it sways both agenda- setting and the promotion of candidates.
The birth of political and social actors like Pastor Evan Mawarire, Fadzai Mahere, Tajamuka and Zvorwadza have also demonstrated the power of social media.
It was social media that brought out huge crowds at the trial of Mawarire.
We have witnessed an active attempt, therefore, to replicate the Obama effect; the Kenya effect or the Arab Spring by bypassing mainstream media and using social media as a viable campaign and mobilisation tool.
At the beginning of the campaign period, Zanu-PF seemed to have assembled a team of attack dogs that viciously tore down the image of the leading opposition candidate.
It is interesting to note that the attacks were focused on one individual and he was initially ridiculed for immaturity, misogyny and bending the truth. No other opposition candidate was attacked with matching vitriol. Most of the initial leading characters on Twitter sharpened their horns and credibility during the internal Zanu-PF wars and thus gained a huge following either discrediting the Lacoste faction propping up G40, or maybe pretending to be silent observers.
The use of Twitter, in particular, peaked in early 2016.
It is easy to see that the more co-ordinated and organised social media team is from Zanu-PF, although the quality of their posts leaves a lot to be desired.
The opposition is propped up by the general populace, self-starters who put up a strong fight against the propaganda machinery.
Agenda-setting
I remember attending a meeting with the late Morgan Tsvangirai when he was grappling with how to harness the youth vote. I advised him to set up a social media command centre to counter print and television propaganda from state media.
In terms of content generation and agenda-setting, Varakashi have been very proactive and even ED has a Facebook and Twitter presence which studies have shown can boost one’s poll numbers. This agenda-setting has, however, not panned out well and attempts to mask deficiencies have resulted in the familiar “lipstick on a pig” retorts.
Considering its budget and military intelligence, I wonder why Zanu-PF didn’t put together a more proficient social media team that could produce quality media instead of the weak histrionics that the Varakashi brigade has subjected us to.
The MDC, clearly destabilised by the formation of the Alliance, has not actively used social media except for viral content generated by users. The strong interest in MDC Alliance activities has made social media a seriously strong platform for the party and a way of compensating for non-coverage by state media.
The battlefront shifted when concerted effort went into discrediting crowds attending rallies with accusations of bussing and trucking in attendees. No-one really talks about bussing on the heavily trodden campaign trail anymore. It is accepted that for various reasons, both candidates draw crowds.
The presence of crowds as a show of support and attempts to keep Chamisa on the defensive, were heavily disrupted by social media early on. Huge crowds were documented for the youthful leader, rally after rally and social media continues to be used by supporters of either candidate to claim the high ground.
What social media has done has been to shift the influence of traditional media and render it almost irrelevant. Even the leading newspaper editors have tried to peddle their influence on social media to little or no effect.
While the mobile penetration rate in Zimbabwe is well above 90%, penetration by the Postal and Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe (PORTRAZ) is above 50%. How influential is social media though? In terms of internet browsing and Twitter, a large proportion of the social media actors are Zimbabweans in the Diaspora, but the same information shared on social media is spread by means of WhatsApp, which is available on cheaper WhatsApp bundles offered by all networks.
Short videos on Twitter and social media have been instrumental in spreading political messages far and wide and opening up the political space. As a result, voters are more informed than in previous years.
In almost every online poll that I have seen, posted from either side, Chamisa always commands a voter percentage of around 65% to 70% as opposed to 30% or so for Mnangagwa.
Although this cannot be a barometer of the election, it is quite clear that the social media wars have been won by the MDC Alliance.
It might be the inherent Diaspora anti-Zanu bias but there are also vocal Diaspora Zanu-PF supporters.
The MDC Alliance should have invested more in their social media campaign, although user-generated content by the likes of Patson Dzamara filters down a lot more.
Zanu-PF is aware of the power of social media and has found a few quality users that generate viral content.
Social media works better when it comes across as spontaneous, user-generated content rather than orchestrated, repetitive choruses of well-funded campaigns. – ZimLive