Cavendish University – Zambia

CAVENDISH UNIVERSITY – ZAMBIA

TOPIC: AN INVESTIGATION INTO FACTORS THAT HINDER PRESS FREEDOM AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN ZAMBIAN MEDIA HOUSES ; A Case Study of ZNBC

NAME: PUMULO MUSONDA

STUDENT NUMBER: 001-263

COHORT; BJMC

DEDICATION

I dedicate my research work to God Almighty. I would not have reached this far in my education without his guidance and strength. I also dedicate this to my late mother; Chanda Musonda, who would have been so proud of the woman I am today. I dedicate this to my late mother’s sister, Jocelyn Musonda who was such a happy mother and friend to all. She was a genuine, rare human being who deserved to live more years on this earth. May their souls continue to rest in peace. I also dedicate this to my other mother; Theresa Mulenga Musonda who has been my pillar of strength, my source of inspiration, wisdom, knowledge and understanding. I owe her everything I am today and everything I am yet to be. I also dedicate this to Chilombo Musonda who has been my angel on earth for the last 25 years. I would give up everything on this earth for her. She has been my motivator and my guardian angel. She has encouraged me all the way and has made sure that I give it all it takes to finish what I started. I also dedicate this to Clara and Jordan Ndhlovu for accommodating me in their home for the last 10years and encouraging me every day of my life through every step of the way. I dedicate this to all my siblings, aunties and uncles; Thenjiwe, Nomsa, Duduzhile, Vusimuzi, Andrah, Niza, Bwalya, Musonda, Virginia, Sr. Julian, Mulenga, Lucy, Vincent, Paul and Mary. I also dedicate this to the new addition to the family; Baby Theresa, who came to this earth on 5th November, 2018 and has bought so much joy to us and also brought the family closer. We thank God for her. I dedicate this to my two best friends; Rhoda Mwambazi and Andrew Banda, for always encouraging me to never give up in the last 4 years that I started pursuing my Degree. Lastly, I thank my lecturer and supervisor; Mr. James Chola for pushing me and guiding me through this journey at Cavendish University. Thank you. My love for you all can never be quantified. God bless you abundantly.

DECLARATION

I ……………………………………….do here by, declare that this research study represents my own work and that it has not been submitted before for a degree at Cavendish University Zambia or any other university.

………………………………. ……………………………. STUDENT’S NAME SIGNATURE

APPROVAL

This research work of ………………………………… is approved in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of bachelor of Mass Communication by Cavendish University Zambia.

Supervisors signature …………………… date……………………….

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research and development of this study is a result of a collective effort of various people. I wish to thank my supervisor, Mr. James Chola for his educative moments and advice. I also wish to thank the Media Institute of Southern Africa- Zambia (MISA), the Times of Zambia, Zambia National Broadcasting Cooperation, and all the reporters and editors including the audience for helping me in the data collection exercise.

I also take this opportunity to thank Cavendish University for allowing me to enroll with them and according me this rare opportunity to do this research paper. I thank my program leader, Mr. Beenwell Mwale for assisting me with all the information on this topic. My special thanks go to my family, my parents, my brothers and sisters and friends for all the encouragement during data collection, exercise and report writing.

ABSTRACT

The news media is central to Zambia's democracy. Ideally, the news media's role is to provide the public with in-depth and factual information, act as a watchdog against abuses of power, and offer a forum for the exchange of opinions, experiences and perspectives.

These functions assist the public to understand complex social and political issues from the local to international level. The news media’s ability to fulfill its democratic role is affected by laws protecting freedom of expression, regulation and censorship; media access to official information, ownership of the media, levels of funding for public-service broadcasting and commercial pressures to increase advertising revenues.

This research looks at how the constitution guarantees freedom of expression and the relevant language that can be interpreted to allow legal restrictions on various grounds. Journalists and media outlets face such restrictions under criminal and civil defamation laws, sedition and obscenity laws and provisions of the penal code including the State Security Act.

A freedom of information bill that had been shelved by previous administrations is also being discussed.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DEDICATION ...... 2 DECLARATION ...... 3 APPROVAL ...... 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... 5 ABSTRACT ...... 6 LIST OF ACRONYMS ...... 9 LIST OF TABLES ...... 10 CHAPTER ONE ...... 11 1.0. INTRODUCTION ...... 11 1.1.BACKGROUND OF STUDY ...... 11 1.2. PROBLEM STATEMENT ...... 23 1.3. RESEARCH PURPOSE ...... 23 1.4. RATIONALE OF THE STUDY...... 24 1.5. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ...... 24 1.6. RESEARCH QUESTIONS...... 24 1.7. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ...... 25 CHAPTER TWO ...... 25 2.1. LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 25 2.1. THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL FRAME WORK ...... 33 2.2. CONCEPTUAL AND OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS ...... 36 CHAPTER THREE ...... 41 3.0. METHODOLOGY ...... 41 3.3. RESEARCH STRATEGY ...... 42 CHAPTER FOUR ...... 44 4.0. INTRODUCTION...... 44 4.0. PRESENTATION OF DATA AND ANALYSIS ...... 45 CHAPTER FIVE ...... 57 5.1. ANALYSIS OF OVERALL FINDINGS ...... 57 CHAPTER SIX ...... 60

6.0. INTRODUCTION ...... 60 6.1. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 61 6.2. RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 63 REFERENCES ...... 65 APPENDICES ...... 69 APPENDIX B ...... 74

LIST OF ACRONYMS

NGO……. …………………….Non-Governmental Organization

MISA ………………………….Media Institute for Southern Africa

MMD…………………………..Movement for Multi-party Democracy

UNIP…………………………...United National Independence Party

PF………………………………Patriotic Front

ZANA………………………….Zambia News Agency

ZAMWA……………………….Zambia Women’s Association

PANA…………………………..Pan African News Agency

PAZA…………………………..Press Association of Zambia

UN……………………………...United Nations

EFZ……………………………..Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia

ZUJ……………………………..Zambia Union of Journalists

FOIA……………………………Freedom of Information Act

IBA……………………………...Independent Broadcasting Authority

ZBS……………………………...Zambia Broadcasting Services

ZNBC……………………………Zambia National Broadcasting Cooperation

LIST OF TABLES

NUMBER OF TABLES PAGE

Table 1.0 distribution of respondents by age…………………………..

Table 1.1 distribution of respondents by sex ………………………….

Table 1.2 ……………………………………………………………………..41

Table 1.3……………………………………………………………………...42

Table 1.4……………………………………………………………………...43

Table 1.5……………………………………………………………………...44

Table 1.6……………………………………………………………………...45

Table 1.7……………………………………………………………………...47

Table 1.8……………………………………………………………………...48

Table 1.9……………………………………………………………………...49

CHAPTER ONE

1.0. INTRODUCTION

In modern economies and societies, the availability of information is central to better decision making by voters, consumers, and investors. Much of that information is provided by the media; including newspapers, television, and radio, which collect information and make it available to the public.

Freedom of the press is essentially the latitude and conditionality that accords a media practitioner the liberty to access and gather information and to select and publish material in order to serve the public without any interference or censorship from any quarters provided that liberty is within the limits set by the individual rights of citizens.

A democratic dispensation therefore, cannot function properly without the participation of journalists. This is because access to information is fundamental in the process of development. Access to information means that citizens are well informed and hence can make informed choices rather than acting out of ignorance or misinformation.

This research looks at the brief history of the media in Zambia as well as the important role it plays in society. It also looks at issues surrounding media legislation and regulation in this country and how they affect its operations.

1.1. BACKGROUND OF STUDY.

It is virtually and practically impossible to talk about the freedom of expression and the battle for a free press in Zambia without taking a drive back into the colonial times.

Phiri (2001)postulates that from a macro-historical perspective, it can be argued that the underlying dynamic, which gradually turned Zambia into a virtual autocracy after independence in 1964, stems from its colonial past although amplified by the Zambians themselves. (Phiri, 2001.p15)

According to Zambia Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers forum (2007), the media in Zambia has not always had a happy existence as elsewhere in Africa. The earliest newspapers like the Livingstone Mail then known as Northern Rhodesia, was aimed at the small white community. Africans were ignored and depicted as criminals or in other negative ways.

Kasoma (1986) observes that ‘The Livingstone Mail was clearly a newspaper for the White settlers. Editorially, it was their voice. Its editorial was written in the collective “we” which often referred to the settler community in Livingstone’. This is why when African nationalists started agitating for change in the 1950s and continuing into the 1960s, they could not count on newspapers, radio, or television to tell their story. (Kasoma, 1986.p.22)

During federation days, the federal government controlled radio and television outlets which were used to demonize black nationalists and tout the views of the federal government (Zambia Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers forum, 2007). Election Reporting Handbook adds that the newspapers at the time; Northern news, and Central African Post slanted news against the black nationalists in their struggle for self-rule and independence.

While criticism of certain aspects of government policy was not allowed, articles favorable to the nationalists cause were censored. After independence in 1964, the new Zambian government recognizing media as an influential and effective vehicle for mass mobilization progressively acquired the Zambia Mail in 1965, and the Times of Zambia and the Sunday Times of Zambia in 1983. (Kasoma 1986, p23) The government viewed the acquisition as one major means of controlling the editorial content of the papers, ensuring achievement of nation-building objectives and of promoting unfettered publicity of government policies and programs. (Zambia Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers forum 2007)

Zambia was born as a sovereign state under Kenneth Kaunda’s government up until 1972. The constitution inherited what has come to be called the Independence Constitution.

It has already been established that prior to Zambia’s independence, the British imposed a state of emergence purely for political reasons and specifically to suppress the freedom of association and speech.

According to the Zambia Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers forum, (2007), President Kaunda thought the media had one purpose; to serve and propagate his policies and those of the ruling UNIP. Press freedom was an alien concept. At the beginning of UNIP rule, the print media was privately owned. Once in power, Kaunda changed all that. He effectively took over control of radio and television, arguing that the media's role was to transform society in line with government policy. Over time, Kaunda appointed the head of the broadcasting facility. Source; (Zambia Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers forum, 2007)

He also appointed, promoted, and fired the editors-in-chief at the Zambia Daily Mail and the Times of Zambia. Under those conditions, the print media could not afford to be critical of Kaunda, UNIP, or the government. The Times of Zambia once carried a leading story about the harmful effects of the government’s approach in dealing with members of the opposition. (Phiri, 2001.p 30)

According to Phiri, this brought a wrath of Kaunda on the Editor who in January 1972, was immediately replaced by Vernon Mwanga as new Editor-in-Chief with a stern warning to Mwanga that the government was expecting not to be confronted with the same thorn in the flesh again (Phiri, 2001.p 30).

With the freedom of the press stifled, in February 1972, Kaunda announced the Cabinet’s decision to establish a one-party state in Zambia through constitutional change.

Though the Commission was set up under the Chairmanship of the Vice-President, Mainza Chona, it is argued that most of the findings were not reflected. In fact, Phiri posits that the Commission itself had very minimal public contribution and debate. (Phiri, 2001, p 31)

In any case, the government went ahead with its white paper, thereby excluding most of the Commission’s recommendations which Phiri says would have made Zambia’s ‘one party participatory democracy’ with at least some semblance of democracy. In August 1972, the Government organized in Lusaka the first ever-national mass media seminar. `Makungu further writes that the two-day conference was attended by nearly all of the country’s journalists; from the print to electronic media, information officers and public relations personnel. (Makungu, 2004; p 21)

In his address at the seminar, President Kaunda accused journalists of failing to reflect Zambian society and often conducting themselves as if they were an alternative government. He declared that from that day onwards, the mass media would be an instrument of nation-building. The seminar unanimously endorsed the President’s remarks and issued several recommendations. ((Makungu 2004, p21)

In the end, the constitutional changes which ushered in the Second Republic reinforced party control over the presidency while simultaneously providing for greater presidential control over the party. This according to Phiri contradicts what Kaunda had suggested in March 1972 that ‘one-party participatory democracy’ would end the politics of patronage. The reverse was in fact the truth (Phiri, 2001; p.17). The Bill was signed and enacted on December 13, 1972. Under this Bill, no person was allowed to attempt to form a political party or organization other than UNIP.

At Independence, Zambia Broadcasting Service (ZBS) came into being as a single-channel television outlet. It was loosely patterned after the British Broadcasting Corporation meaning that it was supposed to be autonomous, nonpartisan, and objective. In practice, ZBS quickly followed in the path trodden by other broadcasting outlets in most African countries.

It became a state run institution that tended to report news only from the government's and ruling party's perspective. (Zambia Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers Forum, 2007)

Phiri writes that ‘the state-run and only broadcasting entity, the Zambia Broadcasting Service (ZBS) parroted the messages of the government.’ (Phiri; 2009.p.136)

Opposition views were absent from ZBS radio and television news. Kaunda and the ruling party saw the broadcast media as handmaidens of the government and UNIP which were there to propagate and spread uncritically pro-government views and policies.

In the Kaunda view, which was shared by many African leaders, opposition parties were enemies whose views should never be published or spread by the media. With a one-party state securely in place, Kaunda was made de facto life President with a slogan ‘one Zambia one nation: one nation, one leader, and that leader, Kaunda, Kaunda wamuyaya’ (Phiri, 2001.p, 50)

Following the 1990 constitutional amendment that legalized multi-party politics, competitive elections were held on 3rd October 1991, which was judged to be relatively “free and fair” by the number of observer teams. Zambia, according to Mwanza (1993) was literally set ablaze with mushrooming of newspapers with a strong bias against UNIP. (Mwanza; 1993.p.13)

These elections attracted international observers and monitoring groups who teamed up with local churches in ensuring that the elections were free and fair. For the first time in Zambia, there grew an atmosphere of issue based politics which were mainly encouraged by the free press.

Mwanza describes this situation as the greatest asset in the new political dispensation which he says should never be allowed to tamper with or it will all be lost.

Mwanza is quick to point out that in exercising this freedom of expression, the people of Zambia and leaders of various parties in particular, had a duty to define the real objectives as a tool with which to mold the nation into a new political and social culture that should stand the test of time for present and future of the generations so that ultimately the people of Zambia would be saying ‘I am proud to be Zambian’. (Mwanza; 1993.p.14)

The results of these elections clearly demonstrated overwhelmingly the rejection of the one party system together with its proponents as a party and Kaunda himself in favor of the Movement for Multi-Party Democracy (MMD). Kenneth Kaunda who from independence, stood as a sole candidate, was eventually removed from state house and replaced by the former Zambian

Congress of Trade Union President, Fredrick Chiluba. Indeed, the elections were a landslide victory for Chiluba and the MMD as a party with Chiluba getting 76 percent vote count while Kaunda only managed to snatch 24 percent. Similarly, the MMD got 125 seats in parliament out of the 150 seats. (Mwanza; 1993; 16)

This commitment to democracy and pluralism was carried through in the constitutional discussion of freedom of expression and the media in Zambia. Article 21 of the constitution States: Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom to receive ideas and information without interference, freedom to impart and communicate ideas and information without interference, whether the communication is to the public generally or to any person or class of person, and freedom from interference with correspondence (Chanda and Liswaniso, 1999.p8). Article 20 goes on to talk about the protection of this freedom as follows: “Subject to the provisions of this constitution, no law shall make any provision that derogates from the freedom of the press”.

From the above constitutional framework, Powers and Phiri posit that the governmental framework of Zambia carries its commitment to pluralism and democracy through its policies regarding the exchange of ideas and press freedom. In terms of normative ideals, they argue that the press in Zambia is clearly meant to be democratic and pluralistic. (Chanda and Liswaniso, 1999.p8)

It is further argued that at the beginning, the MMD speeches were punctuated with commitment to press freedom during the MMD’s bid to cast out Kaunda. At the very first public conference, leaders of MMD championed freedom of speech and criticized the one-party state for falling to foster an environment conducive to a free press. Accordingly, Remmy Mushota, whom Powers and Phiri quote, who became Minister of Legal Affairs when the MMD eventually came to power, identified freedom of the press as one of the most significant freedoms in the process of establishing and sustaining a free and democratic society. (Powers and Phiri, 2001)

The MMD manifesto also stated that: ‘The MMD believes that freedom of expression and the right to information bare the basic human rights. As such, journalists will have to play an important role in promoting democracy and development in MMD-led government’ (Chiluba, 1994 again quoted in Powers and Phiri).

According to Zambia Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers forum (2007), the MMD promised to let journalists do their work without interference, and that those with the means would be able to own print and electronic media outlets. Source ;( Zambia Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers forum 2007),

Those interested in starting private radio and television outlets were encouraged to apply for licenses. A Media Reform Committee was established to chart the way forward. Among the committee's recommendations were privatizing the Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation, privatizing newspapers and putting a press clause in the Zambian constitution. Source; (Zambia Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers forum 2007)

The print media took advantage of the new freedoms. They criticized the new government and its president, made efforts to be a public watchdog, and tried to hold the government accountable for its actions though with a lot of confrontations with some sections of the media like The Post. . Source ;( Zambia Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers forum (2007),

Thus, MMD with its political and economic liberalization, brought in a lot of changes in Zambia in as far as press freedom was concerned. Today, we have more radio (private) stations and TV stations, without mentioning the mushrooming community stations which are now a common feature in nearly all the provinces of Zambia. The number of radio receivers in Zambia grew from 760,000 in 1994 to 1,000,000 in 1996. Source ;( Zambia Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers Forum, 2007). There has also been a number of progressive legislations under the Mwanawasa led government. Among others, the following are examples:

(i) THE ZNBC ACT OF 2002 Government amended the ZNBC Act to remove the regulatory functions from the Minister and transferred the functions to the IBA instead of repealing, as proposed by the media community in the Broadcasting Act. Government in respect, refused to transform ZNBC from a state controlled broadcaster to a public service that was independent and professionally run, a positive move at least for a start. (Makungu, 2004.p.65)

(ii) INDEPENDENT BROADCASTING AUTHORITY (IBA) OF 2002 It provides for the creation of an independent body to oversee the issuing of licenses to people intending to enter into broadcasting, as well as regulating broadcasting in Zambia. It is also supposed to provide legal guidelines for the issuance of licenses (Makungu, 2004.p.65)

(iii)THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL (If it is ever passed into law), is intended to establish a Public Information Commission and to define its functions, provide the right of access to information, and to set out the scope of public information under the control of public authorities to be available to the public in order to, among other things, facilitate more effective participation in the good governance of the country, and to promote transparency and accountability of public officers. The absence of this legislation is denying the public access to some government proceedings and records (Makungu 2004.p.66).

(iv) MEDIA COUNCIL OF ZAMBIA: The establishment of the Media Council of Zambia (MECOZ) is another positive contribution to the role of media in Zambia. In its constitution, MECOZ’s role is affirmed as a voluntary self- regulatory body for journalists (an ethics committee), where the public could forward their complaints and grievances against the media. MECOZ has also formulated the code of ethics to assist journalists to defend the principles of the freedom of the press and information. (JCTR, 2002-2006)

While MMD had tried to liberalize the media in Zambia, it is however the contention of Zambia Press, Media, TV, Radio, News forum (2007) that the MMD had continued to control ZNBC as a state broadcaster. It is acknowledged that the MMD did open up the airwaves to other voices, though in a limited context.

By 1994, for example, the government announced that those interested in starting private radio and television stations could apply for licenses. Some FM and medium wave frequencies were made available for radio, while a few UHF bands were also made available for television broadcasting. Source; (Press, Media, TV, Radio, News forum 2007)

Despite these changes, however, the MMD government was adamant that under the Broadcast Act, no broadcast licenses would be granted to political parties. This has made some people like Andrew Green to categorically state that the MMD had retreated from their original position during the past 17years in terms of press freedom.

No wonder Powers and Phiri argue that the MMD was elected in part on its apparent commitment to the transformation of the media from an instrument of the ruling party, to being an autonomous participant in the democratic process. Source; (Press, Media, TV, Radio, News forum 2007)

Kasoma (1986) posits that democracy entails the right to choose from alternatives regarding the best course of action and to this end, is largely based on the availability of information which lays out those alternatives. In a Zambian situation, for example, a free and pluralistic press is indispensable in guaranteeing the diversity of ownership, channels and opinion that characterize a democratic state (Kasoma, 1986.p 22)

The understanding of Powers and Phiri is that ownership of broadcasting organizations has an undeniable influence on the information that is placed in the public sphere. For this reason, one of the primary requirements of a pluralistic media is the end of monopolies of any a kind (Barker and Minnie, 2001).

The American Heritage Dictionary, according to Powers and Phiri, defines monopoly as exclusive control by one group for the means of producing or selling a commodity or service. Thus, the end of monopolies must encourage multiple controlling parties in a particular industry and also implies direct competition between parties.

As already stated, the one-party state in Zambia nationalized broadcasting. When the MMD came into power, it privatized most industries, but opted not to privatize the state-held media. This means that rather than selling off their media holdings to private individuals or interests, the government retained control of the primary broadcasting channels and merely allowed other participants to enter the market-place (Powers and Phiri, 2001).

The conclusion from the above argument is that the state-run media have neither been privatized nor granted editorial autonomy. They have continued in more or less the same vein in which they operated under the one-party state. The state’s grip on broadcasting in Zambia is still so tight that in many cases, media outlets are handled as civil service entities with heads appointed by political leaders. Government not only monopolizes broadcasting, it has made broadcasters part of the civil service. (Phiri, 1999.p 15)

This has meant that civil servants or politicians with little or no knowledge about the media are often charged with overseeing the way radio and television is operated. Professional broadcasters become subservient to these bureaucrats who determine everything.

There are other people who argue that the entry of community radio stations which has been growing since 1991 is a big step into decentralization and break in the government’s monopolistic hold. Indeed, more community stations have been established and probably more will be established even reaching the most remote areas as already happening.

However, Powers and Phiri deposit that another form of monopoly is developing in Zambian radio, one that is in a separate sector from government broadcasting but no less influential.

Of all the community radio stations operational now, 60 percent or more are controlled by the Roman Catholic Church. (Powers and Phiri,p 32)

This, apparently, according to Powers and Phiri, is reason why government has not done enough in terms of a policy framework to ensure the establishment of truly non-partisan radio that can freely report news and comments without undue pressure from any quarter. It is therefore clear that the initial commitment to freedom of expression and a free press by the MMD in the third republic were merely attempts. (Powers and phiri,p 32)

The Human Rights Watch seems to be aware of this fact when in its findings had stated: In its formal statement, the MMD government appears to be committed to freedom of expression and privatization of the media. In practice, however, the state has kept a tight range on media.

The state continues to control television as well as the mainstreams newspaper, which constitutes some 90 percent of print media. They include the two dailies: The Times of Zambia and the Daily Mail; two Sunday papers, the Sunday Times of Zambia; and one weekly paper, The Financial Mail. All of these newspapers are posted on the Internet on the Zambian home page, ZAMNET, at government expense (1997).

The Human Rights Watch further posits that most of the state-owned media take a strong MMD line which is usually uncritical, if not, unabashedly propagandistic. The Human Rights Watch gives the run up to 1996 elections as a case in point. It further observes that although Radio Phoenix enjoys the so-called freedom of speech, this freedom is actually limited.

This is because, to some large extent, radio Phoenix is privately owned and relies on advertising revenue to ensure financial survival, and eventually some projects. The Human Rights Watch wondered whether the independence of the station is not de facto limited by its need to please major clients. Considering the fact that Zambian political elite and the local business community are closely intertwined, to discontent advertisers would equate to dissatisfying the government.

The Human Rights Watch further states that the government’s claims to “having completely liberalized the media industry” are false. It argues that the Constitution Amendment Act (1996) did not include any of the Media Reform Committee’s 1993 recommendation on press freedom, and none of the committee’s recommendations have been implemented.

These recommendations included privatizing the state newspapers and television stations, and making media ethics and practice the subject of self-regulation by journalists’ associations and other media groups with no statutory power.

It is the contention of HRW that the committee also identifies at least thirteen sections of the 10 concerns which have been expressed regarding the Government’s proposal to form a media council of Zambia (MCZ). There was some suspicion that the establishment of the Council is intended to control the media and reduce freedom of the press

1.2. PROBLEM STATEMENT Zambian legislation limits freedom of expression and information especially through criminal defamation and insult laws that infringe on the expression of independent and critic views. Despite the coming into effect in December 2003 of the IBA and ZNBC Acts, which set up independent boards for the regulator and national broadcaster, they have not yet been fully implemented. (PAZA, 2016) To date therefore, the regulation of broadcasting and the national broadcaster are still under the direct control and influence of the Ministry of Information. The bill of rights has also not been enshrined into the constitution. (Zambia News Agency: ZANA 2015). There are no freedom of information laws in Zambia that sufficiently provide for freedom of the media, freedom of information and good governance. Journalists and members of the public find it difficult to access files from government offices because of the nonexistence of a Freedom of Information Act that guarantees access to information. (MISA, 2016)

The media faces unjust regulation and censorship from ruling authorities. Ownership of the media is also a factor especially if the media is owned by the government. Levels of funding for public-service broadcasting have also been a hindrance to press freedom. (PAZA, 2016)

1.3. RESEARCH PURPOSE

The purpose of this research is to bring out the factors that hinder the media from expressing themselves, and to identify a few limits that are imposed on press freedom which emanate from the laws of the land and journalistic ethical limitations.

This study also aims at establishing whether the battle for a free press has been won or not in Zambia, and whether the past governments; the first, second, third republics and the patriotic front government have been committed to creating an environment of the two freedoms: the freedom of expression and the freedom of the press.

1.4. RATIONALE OF THE STUDY

This study therefore contributes greatly to the understanding of democracy in Zambia and how Zambia as a country has failed in terms of human rights record especially in as far as freedom of expression and freedom of the press is concerned. It is a considered view of this researcher that the battle for freedom of expression and for a free press in Zambia remains unfinished and probably will continue for a number of years to come. But, it is by putting one brick after the other that a house is built. This study is probably another brick towards building a democratic and a free Zambia. Source; (http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/2821)

1.5. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY i. To investigate the factors that hinder press freedom and freedom of expression in Zambia. ii. To establish if there has been any effort to promote the freedom of expression and of the press from past governments and ruling patriotic front. iii. To find out how best the media can be regulated without the violation of both freedoms.

1.6. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

i. What exactly are the factors that hinder press freedom and freedom of expression? ii. What causes the governments to closely regulate and monitor the media? iii. Is the media responsible enough without regulation?

1.7. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This study is intended to bring to the fore the factors that hinder the right to freedom of expression, and how regulation of the media can both positively and negatively affect that protection. It will also contribute to the debate of whether journalism can be professionalized like the legal and medical professions without violation of the right to freedom of expression.

A Jesuit Centre for Theological Reflection (JCTR) online article observes that promoting the right to freedom of information is one of the ways of preventing corruption. This right facilitates participation and is significant to all the efforts people enlist in their fight against corruption. Government should then make certain that free flow of information is allowed. This would encourage people to denounce corruption cases (JCTR, 2011).

CHAPTER TWO

2.0. INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents literature related to the research study. The available literature on press freedom and freedom of expression will state how some scholars and stakeholders at various levels have perceived it.

2.1. LITERATURE REVIEW

Makungu (2004) indicates that in theory, the press in Zambia has always had the freedom to publish what it wants. Although its history, especially after attaining independence, state officials have dictated that majority of cases have succeeded in telling the newsmen and newswomen what they should and should not publish.

This had been the case mainly because the country at the time had no official policy on press freedom. The state did try to pass legislation to formally regulate the press in 1980 through the abortive press council bill which would have completely muzzled the country’s media (Makungu, 2004.p, 21).

The current Zambian constitution does not contain a Bill of Rights of which it enshrines the right to freedom of expression, and which specifically protects freedom of the press. [(Article 20 (1) of the Zambian constitution)] also specifies that the right to freedom of expression includes the ‘freedom to hold opinions without interference’, thereby protecting the media’s right to write opinion pieces and commentary on important issues of the day (Makungu.2 004p, 22)

Though members of the press and their organizations have always resisted the control exerted on them by both party and government officials, the officials especially the United National Independent Party (UNIP) officials during the UNIP rule, came out on top because of the position that UNIP had arrogated itself in the governing structure of the country. Article 22, paragraph 1 of the 1973 constitution of Zambia (Article 20 in the current constitution) reads; ‘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, whether the communication be to the public generally or to any one person or class of persons, and freedom from interference with his correspondence’ (Makungu.p, 22)

However, on page 26 of his book, “State of the media in Zambia” Makungu postulates that just two years into single party rule, President Kaunda redefined the role that the media were supposed to play in the country’s social and economic development. They were expected to promote ‘humanist morals’ in line with Zambia, then philosophy of “humanism” and also to promote cultural values.

The president in his speech to the UNIP national council set fourth conditions for the operation of the media, which were until the end of UNIP rule in 1991, still largely applied. (makungu.2004, p, 26) “The Times of Zambia reflects official party and government, thinking the Sunday times of Zambia must carry analysis in-depth on the party, government and the nation in general. Zambia News Agency (ZANA) must collect news about the whole nation. Television Zambia (TVZ) must apart from dissemination of information, express in-depth the various cultural aspects of this nation apart from entertainment. Radio is to continue dissemination of information by providing entertainment and education in all its important cultural aspects.” (Kaunda,the watershed speech, as reproduced by Moore, 1991.p.68).

Makungu (2004) further notes that in addition to these restrictions, section 53 of the penal code empowers the President at his obsolete discretion to prohibit publications which in his opinion are contrary to the public interest. This law is still in existence. A prohibition order can apply to any periodical, publication or newspaper foreign or local, and may extend to all publications published by a specified person or association of persons whether published before the date of the order or after. (Makungu, 2004.p, 24)

The Presidential powers to ban publications are supported by sanctions provided in section 54 of the code which make it an offence to import, publish, sell offer for sale, distribute or reproduce, in whole, or in part, any prohibited publication. The penalty for this offence is imprisonment for two years, or a fine upon conviction. The prohibited publication also has to be forfeited to the president on behalf of government. (Makungu, 2004.p, 24)

There were several incidents during single party rule which lent credence to current concerns over press freedom in the country. For example, in 1981 then Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting services, John Banda, told graduating students of journalism that;

“Don’t bite the hand that feeds you in the name of a free press, you may end up without a job. In short, there is no such thing as a free press. It is an illusion, a creation of journalists. (Times of Zambia as quoted by Kasoma; 1986.p138)”

Djokoto (2004) points out that media content in Zambia is essentially political in the government owned media. The republican president is the number one newsmaker. Whatever the President says or does makes news headlines, even when it falls short of the news.

Occasionally, the political opposition receives front page prominence in the local press but only when there are defections from its ranks to the ruling party or when a senior opposition member makes statements that are favorable to government or when the Member of Parliament is implicated in a scandal. (Djokoto; 2004.p 14)

For instance, Mumba’s resignation from the NCC to join the ruling movement for multiparty democracy (MMD) was the lead story in the Times of Zambia and the Zambian daily mail on 27th May, 2003. The dissolution of the NCC to join the MMD barely 24 hours after its leaders resigned to join the ruling party was the lead story in both papers on 28th May. (Djokoto; 2004.p 14)

However, the private media are guilty of the same excesses except that in their case, they give editorial prominence to the political opposition or report news that scandalizes the ruling party or embarrass it in one way or another. For example on 22nd May 2003, the lead story in the Post headlined Sikatana, Chitala, booed and insulted over constitution and credited to Brighton Phiri reads in part.(Djokoto,2004.p15)

“Agriculture Minister Mudia Skatana, Labour Minister, Mutale Nalumango and Finance deputy Minister Mubita Chitala were on Tuesday night booed, jeered and showered with abusive language during a debate on constitutional review”.(Djokoto,2004,p15)

On 16 August 2010, then Minister of Information and Broadcasting, Lt. Gen. Ronnie Shikapwasha was quoted as saying that Zambia was not yet ready for the Freedom of Information Act. The minister added that there was need for more consultations over the matter (The Post Newspaper 16thAugust 2010).

Our democracy needs a robust press to hold our leaders accountable and cover the important issues facing our communities. But press freedom is under attack today, with government authorities seizing journalists’ phone records, detaining reporters at border crossings and demanding that journalists reveal the identities of confidential sources.

This kind of harassment does not just affect “professional” journalists. The Internet and new technologies have democratized media making, with more people taking up the tools of journalism. And after years of newsroom layoffs, many of the people who are most at risk are citizen journalists and independent reporters operating outside the mainstream press. (Makungu, 2004.p.28)

The constitution of Zambia then, as it still does today, protected the fundamental rights of freedom of expression. Journalists however, wrongly assumed then, as some had still done in the recent past, that the freedom of expression of the individual also extended to them. President Kaunda however once told them that he would not tolerate any protests from anywhere on the stand the government intended to take to ensure truthful reporting (Times of Zambia, as quoted by Moore ibid .p.80)

Under the State of Emergency which Zambia was under from independence until 7th November 1991 just after the end of UNIP rule in 1991, the preservation of public security act Cap 106 of the laws of Zambia (now chapter 112 of the laws of Zambia) section 3(2a) gives the president additional powers to allow him indefinite suspension of the constitution to allow for the control of freedom of the people and by implication the press. This law can only come into operation when there is a declaration of emergency. (Makungu, 2004 p.28)

With all these various direct and indirect provisions of control, Zambia’s media even in the ‘new’ third democratic republic are still subject to two forms of censorship, pre-publication (or broadcast) and self-censorship.

As Moore(1991) observed as cited in Makungu(2004), self-censorship is the worst form of censorship because the journalist, from his own choice, breaches his professional ethics and betrays the public trust even if the choice not to cover a story or ‘to’ alter the way that it is covered is made unconsciously, (Makungu2004.p30)

It is important to understand that media regulation and legislation does not only protect the functions of the media, but also involves and affects people in society. However, the Medias plea for self-regulation has been in vain. This is so because of the power of the media to damage reputations, invade privacy and conduct partisan campaigns. (Matibini, 2006.p18)

Libel is the most obvious constraint. However, skillful editing can permit damage to be done at minimal risk to the publishers. The comparative freedom enjoyed by the media to behave unfairly towards individuals and organizations has led to the establishment of tribunals that aim to regulate media ethics through adjudicating complaints by members of the public who claim to have unfairly treats by journalists and editors. Typically, the tribunals have no legal powers, but their adjudications will usually be published by the paper complained against and quite often by rival papers. (Djokotoe, 2004.p15)

It is important to stress from the outset that the purpose of these tribunals is to protect editors and journalists from the advent of laws that could restrict their freedom to investigate. They function as a device for condemning journalist’s behavior of a kind that if it were not deterred would almost certainly be curbed by parliament. (Djokotoe, 2004.p15)

The tribunals therefore, offer a form of insurance against new laws to safeguard personal privacy, prohibit check book journalism and to guarantee a right of reply. These tribunals could serve the interests. (Djokotoe, 2004.p15)

The aim of promoting self-regulation is to buttress press freedom and protect readers. However, if editors and journalists are not prepared to take responsibility for their own behavior, the government will be more than willing to implement regulation on their behalf; be it through statutory bodies or harsh regulation. (Matibini, 2006.p19)

ORGANISATIONS INVOLVED IN THE FIGHT FOR A FREE PRESS IN ZAMBIA

With the coming in of the Patriotic Front (PF) government, various media institutions such as the Media Institute for Southern Africa (MISA), Zambian Union of Journalists (ZUJ), and the Press Association of Zambia (PAZA) had continued advocating the enactment of Freedom of Information law in Zambia. Source; (Media Institute for Southern Africa, 2016)

These media institutions had continued discussions with other stakeholders such as Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES) and Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs) on the importance of having a Freedom of Information Act in Zambia and how it can help journalists in being proactive, effective, and efficient in their operations. (MISA 2016)

The Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) Zambia has called for the amendment of certain provisions in the Penal Code as it considers them archaic and no longer applicable. The institution has therefore been working and holding meetings with various partners and stakeholders to try and identify issues of media concern with the ultimate aim of producing a submission outlining areas of amendments of the Penal Code and other related legislation. Source ;( http://www.misazambia.org.zm)

Some of the provisions in the Penal Code that MISA Zambia feels need to be amended or completely removed include the prohibited publications, seditious practices, defamation of the president, publication of false news, obscene materials and the public order act among others.(MISA,2016)

MISA Zambia chairperson Helen Mwale said freedom of expression was limited despite it being guaranteed under article (20) of the constitution of Zambia. She explained that MISA Zambia desired to see a Zambia where people would be free to express themselves and achieve an objective of decriminalizing laws inimical to media freedom and free expression. MISA Zambia has being an advocate for the freedom of expression and the enactment of the Access to Information (ATI) law. (MISA, 2016)

However, Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) Zambia observes that there have been sporadic attacks on the freedom of the press by the Mwanawasa government. MISA-Zambia gives the following as some of the showcases of the difficulties the media experienced in the Mwanawasa government: On May 4, 2007, the then Southern Province Minister, Joseph Mulyata, threatened Sky FM, a commercial radio station in Monze about 200 kilometers south of Lusaka, with closure for what he termed “unethical and unprofessional” conduct. This was after the station featured Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia (EFZ) Executive Director, Bishop Paul Mususu, who was discussing Zambia’s constitution making process. Mususu was speaking on behalf of Oasis Forum, which has been critical of the government on the constitution making process. Source ;( http://www.misazambia.org.zm)

On May 17, 2007, Minister of Information and Broadcasting Services, Mike Mulongoti, threatened to withdraw the broadcasting license of Petauke Explorers Radio Station for featuring Patriotic Front President, Michael Sata on a paid programme during the campaign for Kapoche Constituency by-election in the district. (MISA, 2016)

On July 19, 2007, police in Lusaka blocked Q-FM, a private radio station in Lusaka, from mounting their outside broadcasting equipment to cover live a demonstration organized by the Oasis Forum and Collaboration Group on the Constitution outside Parliament grounds in Lusaka. The police said the permit issued to the conveners of the petition and demonstrators did not include mounting the outside broadcast unit for live coverage of the event. (MISA, 2016)

On September 10, 2007, Zambia’s Minister of Information and Broadcasting Services, Mike Mulongoti, said journalists at the state-owned Zambia Daily Mail and Times of Zambia should not criticize the government and its leaders because they have jobs to protect. (MISA, 2016)

There were also some attempts by the Mwanawasa government to deport Post Newspaper columnist, Roy Clarke, but was quashed by the Supreme Court of Zambia which upheld the 2004 ruling of the Lusaka High Court not to deport Clarke, a British national permanently resident in Zambia.

According to MISA Zambia, Clarke wrote a satirical article published in the privately owned Post Newspaper on 1st January, 2004 allegedly insulting President Levy Mwanawasa. MISA Zambia indicates that the ruling against the deportation of Clarke was a historical victory in favor of freedom of expression and the right to information. (MISA, 2016)

2.1. THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL FRAME WORK

This study is based on the normative theories of the mass media which were first proposed by Fred Siebert, Peterson and Wilbur Schramm in their book called “Four Theories of the Press”. At first, the word “Normative Theory” was pronounced in USA during the height of ‘cold war’ with communism and soviet. Often, it was called western theories of mass media.

A Normative theory describes an ideal way for a media system to be controlled and operated by the government, authority, leader and public. These theories are basically different from other communication theories because normative theories of the press are not providing any scientific explanations or prediction. At the same, these “four theories of the press” came from many sources rather than a single source. Sometimes, media practitioners, social critics and academics were also involved in developing these normative theories. (Glasser,e,tal 2009, p, 37)

Normative theories are more focused on the relationship between Press and the Government than press and the audience. These theories are more concerned about the ownership of the media and who controls the press or media in the country.

2.1.1. AUTHORITARIAN THEORY

Authoritarian theory describes that all forms of communications are under the control of the governing elite, authorities or influential bureaucrats. Authoritarians are necessary to control the media so as to protect and prevent the people from national threats through any form of communication (information or news). The press is an instrument used to enhance the ruler’s power in the country rather than any threats.

The authorities have all rights to permit any media and control it by providing licenses to the media and make certain censorship. (Siebert 1956, p 56)

If any media violate the government policies, then the authority has all rights to cancel and revoke the license. The government has all the rights to restrict any sensitive issues from the press to maintain peace and security in the nation. This theory was used in this study because it partly explains the operations of Zambian media organizations such as ZNBC that were at the time of the study, owned and controlled by the government. (Siebert 1956, p 56)

2.1.2. THE LIBERTARIAN THEORY

The Libertarian theory is one of the “Normative theories of press”. The theory originally came from libertarian thoughts from 16th century in Europe. The libertarian theorists are against the authoritarian thoughts. (Siebert 1956, p 56)

Liberalism means information is knowledge and knowledge is power. Libertarianism is free from any authority or any control or censorship. The libertarianism is an idea of individualism and limited government which is not harmful to another. Libertarian theory sees people as good enough to find and judge good ideas from bad. The theory says people are rational and their rational thoughts lead them to find out what are good and bad. The press should not restrict anything because even negative content may give knowledge. (Siebert 1956, p 56)

The libertarian thoughts are exactly against or opposite to the authoritarian theory, which means the authoritarian theory says “all forms of communication works under the control of government or elite like king”. This theory was relevant to this study because it helped to explain how mass media, including those in Zambia, got affected by lack of freedom of information. (Siebert 1956, p 56)

2.1.3. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY THEORY

Social responsibility theory allows free press without any censorship, but at the same time, the content of the press should be discussed in public panel and media should accept any obligation from public interference or professional self-regulations or both. The theory lies between both authoritarian theory and libertarian theory because it gives total media freedom in one hand, but also exerts external controls on the other hand. (Glasser,e,tal 2009, p, 65)

In mid-20th century, most of the developing countries and third world nations have used this social responsibility theory of press which is associated with “the Commission of the Freedom of Press” in the United States in 1949. In the book “Four theories of Press” (Siebert, Peterson and Schramm) it has been stated that “pure libertarianism is antiquated, out dated and obsolete.” That of course, paved way for replacement of Libertarian theory with the Social responsibility theory. (Glasser, e, tal, 2009.p65)

Here, the press ownership is private. The social responsibility theory moves beyond the simple “Objective” reporting (facts reporting) to “Interpretative” reporting (investigative, reporting).

The theory helped in creating professionalism in media by setting up a high level of accuracy, truth, and information. The commission of press council also included some tasks based on social responsibility of media, which are as follows:

1. Formulate the code of conduct for the press. 2. Improve the standards of journalism.

3. Safeguarding the interests of journalism and journalist. 4. Criticize and make some penalty for violating the code of conduct.

THE THEORY ALLOWS 1. Everyone to say something or express their opinion about the media. 2. Community opinion, consumer action and professional ethics. 3. Serious invasion of recognized private rights and vital social interests. 4. Private ownership in media may give better public service unless government has to take over to assure the public to provide better media service. 5. Media must take care of social responsibility and if they do not, government or other organization will do. (Siebert 1956,p 56)

This theory was required in this research because media in Zambia, partly subscribe to the ideals of social responsibility. Furthermore, ideas about freedom of information all generally border on social responsibility and the public interest.

2.2. CONCEPTUAL AND OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS

2.2.1. PRESS FREEDOM

Freedom of the press or freedom of the media is the freedom of communication and expression through mediums including various electronic media and published materials. While such freedom mostly implies the absence of interference from an overreaching state, its preservation may be sought through constitutional or other legal protections.

2.2.2. . FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society. Freedom of expression is a basic condition of the progress and development of citizens and society. Without freedom of expression, free discussion particularly on political issues, so essential for the proper functioning and execution of the processes of responsible government is not possible (PAZA, 2016)

2.2.3. MEDIA

Media are channels of communication that serve many diverse functions such as dissemination of news and information, entertainment or sport, with either mass or specialized appeal. The types of media include print and electronic (PAZA, 2016)

2.2.4. CENSORSHIP

Censorship is a suppression of any communication which may be considered as harmful to the people, king, government and its nation. (PAZA, 2016)

In some other cases, the censorship helps to protect the rulers and authorities from sensitive issues. Here, the journalist or any media persons should not have any rights to comment, discriminate or stand against the government. Sometimes, an authority gives considerable freedom to minority thoughts and cultural issues to promote them if it does not make any threats to the authority or ruler (PAZA, 2016)

2.2.5. DEFAMATION

Defamation is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual person, business, product, group, government, religion or nation. Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and have been made to someone other than the person defamed.

Some common law jurisdictions also distinguish between spoken defamation, called slander, and defamation in other media such as printed words or images, called libel. False light laws protect against statements which are not technically false but misleading. (PAZA, 2016)

2.2.6. HINDER

To hinder means to make it difficult for somebody to do something or for something to happen. (PAZA, 2016)

2.2.7. FACTORA

Factora is one of the elements contributing to a particular result or situation. (PAZA, 2016)

2.2.8. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LEGISLATION

These are rules that guarantee access to data held by the state. They establish a "right-to-know" legal process by which requests may be made for government-held information to be received freely or at minimal cost, barring standard exceptions (PAZA, 2016)

2.2.7. CONCEPTUAL MODEL

media legislation self censorship the penal code and and the government constitution censorship

press freedom and freedom of expression

ADVOCACY INSTITUTIONS MISA,PAZA,ZUJ,ZAMWA

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION,AMENDMENTS IN THE PENAL CODE

2.3. RESEARCH VARIABLES ARISING FROM LITERATURE

According to the draft revised media policy (2000), there are several factors which have affected the media in a negative way .These include; inadequate funding, which has led to a situation where media operate with obsolete or inadequate equipment, archaic technologies, inadequate transport, inadequate training, and poorly motivated staff. As a result, public media have been unable to return trained, qualified and professional journalists. Source ;( draft revised media policy, 2000)

Another problem although great progress has been made in the recent past is the inadequate media and communication infrastructure which has led to poor radio and television coverage, thereby denying information to most people living in the rural parts of the country.

The poor infrastructure such as inaccessible roads in rural parts of the country and the nonexistence of telecommunication services in other parts, has affected distribution and outreach of print media products such as newspapers and magazines.

Others are lack of access to modern information and communication technologies, which has affected timely and effective delivery of information and inadequate capacities to transmit news and information in Zambia to the outside world using information and communication technologies, thereby experiencing an imbalance in the influence on international audiences.(Makungu,2004;p.63)

Dr matibini (2006) further stated that the high cost of newsprint and equipment which has hindered the growth of existing media and discouraged some new investment, is another addition to the many newspapers that had started well but folded up as a result of failure to meet the high cost of imported newsprint and machinery (matibini,2006;p.13)

Inadequate capacity arising from low funding has made it difficult for public media in particular, to cover development issues in far flying areas. Inadequate training and a lack of specialization among journalists excavate this situation.

On untrained personnel, the document is concerned about the proliferation of non-professionals in the media industry and the subsequent competition based on profit motive as well as “yellow journalism”, which it says have tended to encourage negative reporting thereby leading to a distortion of the country’s image (makungu.2004,p.62)

CHAPTER THREE

3.0. METHODOLOGY

This chapter highlights the various research techniques and approaches that were used in the research methodology. It contains: research (design, strategy, choice) methods, population, sample size, sampling procedures, data collection methods, reliability and validity and limitation of study.

3.1. RESEARCH DESIGN. A research design refers to the researchers overall plan or blueprint of how the research is to be conducted. It defines a research design that is formulated to enable the researcher find valuable means of finding out ‘what is happening to seek new insights. Research design `deals with a logical problem and not a logistical problem'. (Yin, 1989; p29)

Before a builder or architect can develop a work plan or order materials, they must first establish the type of building required. The work plan flows from this. Similarly, in social research, the issues of sampling, method of data collection (e.g. questionnaire, observation, document analysis) are used. (Yin, 1989; p 29)

The research design employed in the study was primarily qualitative. This approach was used in order to gather views of people, reporters, editors, advocacy institutions and media houses in Zambia and Lusaka in particular. This approach intended to make an investigation on the factors that hinder press freedom and freedom of expression in the Zambian media. Source ;( field data, 2016)

3.2. RESEARCH APPROACH. Research approach is an approach chosen according to the nature of the research topic under analysis and the research questions they aim to answer. An exploratory approach was used because the research involved investigating the factors that hinder press freedom and freedom of expression in Zambia. The approach of this study was qualitative. Data was sourced from various studies conducted before. That is, information from the media houses, academic information. (Cress well 2008)

3.3. RESEARCH STRATEGY Rabson (2002) defined research strategy as a general approach taken in an inquiry, and added that research strategies have been classified in different ways, while Saunders et.al (2007) defined it as a general plan of how you go about answering the research questions you have set.

The method relies on the principle of verifiability, substantiation and proof. It focuses on measurement of numerical events according to the rules. It is used to understand anticipated results from qualitative data. This method was equally used because numerical events and proof were necessary for the study. The approach provided both numerical and empirical support to the phenomenon under study. (Rabson, 2002; p10)

3.4. CHOICE OF SITE

The Post newspaper and Zambia National Broadcasting Cooperation (ZNBC) were chosen because they were accessible to the residence of the researcher. Another reason was that all the media houses had faced problems in as far as press freedom was concerned.

3.5. TARGET POPULATION.

The target population for this study was 500 journalists from ZNBC and The Post newspaper.

3.6. SAMPLE SIZE AND SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

The study sampled 50 participants purposively chosen. 50 questionnaires were administered; 25 for the Post newspaper and 25 for ZNBC. Participants were picked at random in all the media houses to give out information on the factors hindering press freedom and freedom of expression.

3.6 DATA COLLECTION

The researcher collected data primarily through interviews, administered questionnaires, focus discussion groups and participant observation. The researcher conducted interviews with respondents in groups and with individuals at the convenience of the respondents. The researcher interviewed and conducted focused discussions with the reporters and further collected data from the editors through administered questionnaires. The researcher also carried out participant observation at the Post newspaper.

3.6.1 INSTRUMENT OF DATA COLLECTION

QUESTIONAIRES

Questionnaires were used on the editors, reporters, advocates and audience. The questionnaire included both closed and open ended questions that were physically administered by the researcher.

INTERVIEWS

Interviews were conducted with the reporters, editors, advocates, and audience in order to get first-hand information about their perception towards press freedom and freedom of expression and factors hindering the two freedoms.

50% of the reporters supported the media laws saying that they should not be changed, but stated that the ruling government should avoid suppressing these laws, while 50% of reporters said that the laws should be changed because they do not support public media houses. In addition, some reporters said that the government in power only wants them to publish information in their favor and failure to do this, they risk losing their jobs.

Meanwhile out of all the audience interviewed, 80% revealed that they did not have knowledge about the freedom of information bill, while 20% of the audience had knowledge.

DATA ANALYSIS

Data was analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. The information from the interviews was recorded in such a way that responses were put into categories. The qualitative analysis of the questionnaires allowed more meaningful explanation of the data that was revealing towards press freedom and freedom of expression in terms of factors hindering them. Quantitative data was summarized and presented as percentages using tables.

CHAPTER FOUR

4.0. INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the findings of the study, analysis and interpretation of the data collected by means of questionnaires, interview guides and purposively selected stakeholders as research methods and instruments. In this chapter, findings from the field data are presented and analyzed. They are categorized according to the respondents picked in the zone. The chapter reviews the factors hindering press freedom and freedom of expression in the media based on the collected data from selected media houses in Lusaka.

Below are the findings of reporters, editors, advocacy representatives, and audience of the selected media houses. These were randomly selected members of the public who answered the main questionnaire, media organization management officials who responded to the in-depth interviews and reporters from various media organizations who attended focus group discussions. Each group gave vital information that forms the findings of this study.

4.0. PRESENTATION OF DATA AND ANALYSIS

Table 1.0 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY AGE

AGE GROUP FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

18-25 9 18% 26-32 20 40%

33-40 11 22%

41 and above 10 20%

TOTAL 50 100%

AGE GROUP 18-25 26-32 33-40 41 and above TOTAL

Source: Field data (2016)

Table 1.0 above shows a summary of the age distribution of the respondents. The majority of the respondents, 40% in the study were in the age group 26-32, more than 22% of the respondents were in the 33-40 age groups, age group 41-and above comprised 20% of the respondents.

Out of the total of 50 respondents, 70% percent were male, and 30% percent were female. Table 1.1 below shows this distribution of the sample.

Table1.1. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY SEX

ITEM FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

FEMALE 15 30% MALE 35 70% TOTAL 50 100%

item f m

30%

70%

Source ;( field data, 2016)

DISTRIBUTION OF DATA BY LEVEL OF EDUCATION

LEVEL OF EDUCATION There has never been any nation which has developed without the factor of education. Education plays a pivotal and irreplaceable role in nearly all facets of human endeavor. This study therefore takes particular interest in the educational levels of the respondents and their perception of democracy in relation to media environment in Zambia.

Table 1.2 LEVEL OF FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE EDUCATION Primary level 0 0%

Secondary level 10 10%

College level 30 30%

University degree 10 10% level Post graduate degree 0 0% level TOTAL 50 100%

Primary level Secondary level College level University degree level Post graduate degree level TOTAL

10%

50% 30%

10%

Source ;( field data 2016)

Is Zambia a democratic state? This research revealed that most Zambians are interested to see Zambia become truly a democratic state. The governance issues should not just be relegated to political sloganeering, but that democratic governance should be seen in operational terms in the various institutions and wings of government and in laws.

Table 1.3

RESPONDENTS FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

POSITION

YES 48 96%

NO 2 4%

no 4%

yes 96%

Source ;( field data, 2016)

Would you say freedom of expression and freedom of the press go hand in hand with democratization?

There has always been an argument whether freedom of expression and freedom of the press are totally indispensable to democracy or is simply part of it. There is one school of thought which argues that democracy and a free and independent press are inseparable. Others however, belong to the school which says you can have one without the other.

Table 1.4

RESPONDENTS FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE POSITION YES 39 78%

NO 11 22%

25 item

20 yes

15 no

0 1 2 3

Source ;( field data, 2016)

How has the Zambian government been committed to a free and conducive press in Zambia?

The Zambian government from independence in 1964 up to date has dealt with the press differently. For instance, President Levy Patrick Mwanawasa’s government is said to have been merely ‘gentle’ towards the press, but was slow in committing it to the legal framework which would have guaranteed complete free flow of information. Sitting governments and in particular, sitting presidents have a lot of bearing on the environment in which the media operates from. This can be deduced from the unbalanced pronouncements either from government officials or presidents themselves concerning the media in the country.

Table 1.5

RESPONDENTS FREQUENCY PECENTAGE POSITION Very committed 0 0% committed 13 26% Somewhat 20 40% committed Not committed 17 34% TOTAL 50 100%

FREQUENCY

20 17 13

Very committed Somewhat Not TOTAL committed committed committed

Have you ever heard of the Freedom of Information Bill?

In responding to the question, “have you ever heard of the freedom of information bill?” 26% of the respondents said they had heard about the freedom of information bill, while 24% said they had never heard about it. Table1.6 shows that the number of people who had heard of the freedom of information bill was more than the number of those who had not.

Table 1.6 RESPONDENTS FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE POSITION YES 26 52% NO 24 48% TOTAL 50 100%

NO 48% YES 52%

Source ;( field data, 2016)

Is there need of changing media laws governing freedom of information?

For press freedom to flourish, it must be supported by good and entrenched laws which the media can operate from. In Zambia, the constitution provides that framework in Article 20 of the republican constitution which guarantees the freedom of the press and freedom of expression. The responses of both female and male respondents as to whether these laws should be changed or not is shown in the table below

Table 1.7 SEX RESPONSES TOTAL

YES NO MALES 6 25 31 FEMALES 9 10 19

TOTAL 15 35 50

item 0%

yes 19%

no 81%

Source ;( field data, 2016)

Which among the following media is more convenient to you?

The question, ‘which among the following media is more convenient to you?’ was also investigated. From the results in the table, it is clear that more people access information through television and the internet. However, it is mostly the people who have attained tertiary education who have heard of the freedom of information bill.

Table 1.8 MEDIUM FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE TELEVISON 19 38% RADIO 13 26% NEWSPAPER 3 6% INTERNET 15 30%

INTERNET 30% TELEVISON 38%

NEWSPAPER 6% RADIO 26%

Source ;( field data, 2016)

Which of the following best describes the persuasive power of the media in Zambia?

As the maturation of democracy in Zambia continues, the Zambian media is indeed posed for a brighter future. This, however, is not saying the battle will be easy. On the contrary, it is by stepping up the fight by organizations such as MISA and its allies that such a vision will be actualized.

Table1.9 RESPONDENTS POSITION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE Very powerful 0 0% powerful 16 32% Somewhat powerful 25 50% Not powerful 9 18%

Table 1.9 above shows that 0(0%), none of the respondents indicated that the persuasive power of the media was very powerful, while 16(32%) of the respondents thought the persuasive power of the media was powerful, 25(50%) of the respondents who answered the questionnaire indicated that the persuasive power of the media is somewhat powerful, a minority of respondents 9(18%) indicated that that the persuasive power of the media is not powerful at all.

Very powerful powerful Somewhat powerful Not powerful

0% 18% 32%

50%

Source; (field data, 2016)

CHAPTER FIVE

5.1. ANALYSIS OF OVERALL FINDINGS

FACTORS THAT HINDER PRESS FREEDOM AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN ZAMBIA

According to the draft revised media policy (2000), there are several factors which have affected the media in a negative way. These include; inadequate funding, which has led to a situation where media operate with obsolete or inadequate equipment, archaic technologies, inadequate transport, inadequate training, and poorly motivated staff. As a result, public media have been unable to return trained, qualified and professional journalists. Source ;( draft revised media policy, 2000)

Zambian legislation limits freedom of expression and information especially through criminal defamation and insult laws that infringe on the expression of independent and critic views. Despite the coming into effect in December 2003 of the IBA and ZNBC Acts, which set up independent boards for the regulator and national broadcaster, they have not yet been fully implemented. (PAZA, 2016)

WHAT CAUSES MEDIA REGULATION AND MONITORING

There is no single or simple answer to the question `why regulate?' and often the surface reasons given conceal other purposes (especially the interests of the state). Even so, general reasons for media regulation can be proposed, as follows, with a very high dependence on all forms of communication.

The governments regulate the media for protection of public order and support for instruments of government and justice.

Media regulation can be done in order to protect individual and sectional rights and interests that might be harmed by unrestricted use of public means of communication, and the promotion of access to freedom of communication, diversity and universal provision as well as securing communicative and cultural ends chosen by the people for them.

ZAMBIA AS A DEMOCRATIC STATE The overall revelation of this study is that Zambia is a democratic state. This is evident by the total number of 96 percent of those who said Zambia was a democratic state. It is however important to note that while 4 percent of the respondents disagreed that Zambia is not a democratic state, in the Focus Group Discussions and In-depth interviews, people questioned the level or degree of democracy in Zambia.

The question at this time therefore, is not whether Zambia is or not democratic. The question is how far Zambia has proceeded in the democratization process. This is a legitimate and timely question because eighteen years ago in 1991, Zambia was a model for democracy in Africa. This was mainly due to a smooth transition from one party state to democracy. (Makungu, 2004, p; 24)

WOULD YOU SAY FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND FREEDOM OF THE PRESS GO HAND IN HAND WITH DEMOCRATIZATION?

The question of democracy in Zambia naturally brings to the consideration of one of the pillars of democracy namely, Press freedom. According to this study, 67 percent of the total respondents feel that democratization goes hand in hand with freedom of the press and expression. Only 29 percent think that the statement is nowhere near the truth. (Field data, 2016)

The starting point of the analysis of this revelation is the question as to why the press has only some level of independence. Why should this freedom be given in piece meals in a democratic state like Zambia? It should always be remembered that modern society is radically different from the way traditional societies were organized.

One of the major differentiating factors is what is called the ‘fourth estate’ which is a free press. Press freedom is critically important as it brings out the checks and balances so that no single person or state can dominate the other at the expense of the poor. (Makungu 2004, p 24)

HOW HAS THE ZAMBIAN GOVERNMENT BEEN COMMITTED TO A FREE AND CONDUCIVE PRESS FREEDOM IN ZAMBIA?

The 2002 World Press Freedom Day celebrations whose theme was “Towards Media Law Reform in 2002 and beyond” were used to propel the need for the media law reforms into the public agenda. Moreover, in 1992, there came to birth the Media Reform Committee whose task was to recommend to Government ways in which media freedom and also the democratic process could be implemented in the country. To date, Makungu bemoans that Government has not been willing to offer its cooperation in matters of media liberalization. He however, acknowledges the enactment of the two pieces of legislation (IBA) and (ZNBC) as a step in the right direction, but says this does not go far enough (Makungu, 2004; p62).

HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL?

During in-depth interviews, the respondents said that a freedom of information act is an act of Parliament that promotes access to information held by public offices that is of public interest. The respondents stated that such an act helps the media and people in society to have access to information in government offices and hold those in government offices accountable for their own actions. It is therefore true when Phiri (1999) summarizes the scenario that there was a brief period (just before and soon after 1991) when it appeared that media would become an independent influence in a democratic environment, but any movement in that direction has been thwarted by continued state control of the country’s major establishment. (Phiri, 1999, p; 30)

IS THERE NEED OF CHANGING MEDIA LAWS GOVERNING FREEDOM OF INFORMATION?

According to Chirwa (1996), the country can and should be able to take cognizance of press practices in other countries and draw from their experiences without necessarily transplanting any irrational and irrelevant ones. (chirwa 1996,p;8) The United States for example, has at many times been quoted as one of the countries that offer an ideal environment for the freedom of the Press, citing the provision of the First Amendment 1791 which states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the Press; or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

It is now an open secret that the Zambian government has had a strong intention of regulating the media in Zambia through a statutory media council, citing irresponsible reporting and a failure by the media to regulate itself. However, when asked, an interviewee argued that the absence of a freedom of information act was a great challenge to journalists. He said that journalists from time to time find it extremely difficult to access government documents that have information that is of public interest and therefore, media laws should not be changed. The only request that journalists have is that government should stop interfering with those laws.

CHAPTER SIX

6.0. INTRODUCTION

This chapter looks at the major findings of the research and draws a conclusion from information that has been obtained. It also looks at the recommendations and further research that has not been covered in this study.

6.1. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The battle for media freedom in Zambia is not perceived but real. The battle has been going on from the time of colonial rule when a voice of an African in the then Northern Rhodesia was conveniently excluded from print and electronic media which was strictly controlled and served only the interests of the white minority. This study was able to identify the factors that hinder freedom of expression and freedom of the press in Zambia.

The research concludes that the Penal Code for example, and many others, remains a hindrance of media freedom. The Penal Code gives unlimited powers to the President to declare any material which he himself may find a danger to the interest and welfare of Zambia.

It is true that material things in this world bring and help human beings to live a happy life. But it is also true that democracy, freedom of expression, and in particular freedom of the press, add a lot of flavor and goodness to human life as it spurs innovations, thus making life itself more fulfilling and worth living. (The Post 2010p12)

In the independence constitution, there was no provision that specifically guaranteed the right to access information held by public bodies. Since then, successive governments have sought through various Constitution Review Commissions to consolidate democracy in Zambia. In the context of the Constitution Review Commissions, attempts have been made to enact freedom of information legislation.

Even as the media acts as a watchdog in society for the benefit of the people, it has historically been viewed as being overly aggressive and greedy in its plight for the latest and hottest news. Its watchdog-type function is essential in a democratic society where people must know what their governments are doing.

The legal environment of most African countries is one that severely restricts the ability of journalists to source information about government’s policies and activities and properly inform the public. The environment is one in which investigative reporting is either impossible or extremely dangerous because it is difficult to obtain information.

In some countries, it is an offence for public officers to give information to the public, including the media. This creates a serious problem for the investigative journalists seeking information as public officers are usually unwilling to produce information.

The journalists can, therefore, hardly secure any information through official sources. Although there is the option of getting information through unofficial sources such as drivers and general workers, this can be extremely dangerous because most African countries do not have laws that have full protection for journalists.

Confidential sources and journalists enjoy no immunity regarding disclosure of their sources. They can therefore be compelled by judicial or legislative bodies to disclose where they got their information from even when such sources were confidential. This obviously affects the willingness of public officials to give information to journalists anonymously or confidentially.

It is the conclusion of this study enlightened by both quantitative and qualitative methodology that all the past three governments under review came to realize very quickly that information is power. While the Chiluba and Mwanawasa governments made a song and dance out of democratic values, they generally remained adamant on the formulation of media friendly policy and laws.

6.2. RECOMMENDATIONS

STRENGTHENING DEMOCRATIC RULE For democracy to truly take root and to mature, there must be a strong will by politicians to give greater and unquestionable separation of powers to the three wings of government namely: The executive, the Legislature and the Judicially and also where even the press can operate freely without undue interferences. (Makungu, 2004; p, 9). These institutions must be autonomous so that they function and execute their constitutional roles they are mandated to do. Makungu (2004) writes that ‘The Press has often been described as the Fourth Estate, (the others being the Executive, Judiciary and Legislature,) because full and accurate information on matters of public interest is measured by institutions and governments and all others in positions of authority are held accountable to and by the public. And as such, the media serves as a watchdog against the abuse of power and against corruption in public life’ (Makungu; 2004, p.2).

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL The Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill needs mention and recommendation because it was shelved by government after it was introduced in 2002. The reasons surrounding its withdrawal have not been satisfactorily forthcoming. This has in the long run opened up to a lot of speculations as to why the government has grown cold feet over this important piece of legislation.

There is need to translate the FOIB into local languages so that people who do not understand the English language very well could be able to read in the languages they understand. This would make them understand the contents and appreciate the importance of the Bill.

There is only one way forward for the FOI. This one way is for the government to resurrect and take the Bill to Parliament for further debate and eventually to see to it that it is enacted.

Freedom of Information is a must in Zambia now and it must be stated clearly in the constitution, that citizens have a right to information and it does not matter who is holding that information.

REGULATION OF THE MEDIA The call for the regulation of the media is a serious consideration and a wakeup call for the media in Zambia. A regulated media cannot guarantee a free media and therefore, a regression in the process of democratization. This is because the word regulation connotes control and restrictions. Regulation of the media therefore, has very little to do with the modern concept of democracy and media freedom.

The media must avoid fragmentation and working in isolation as individual media houses. Instead, they must come together to form a one strong formidable self-regulative body where ethical standards are adhered to and followed in the spirit of professionalism, responsible reporting, and over and beyond, in the spirit of self-criticism.

On the other hand, institutions such as Evelyn Hone College and the University of Zambia charged with the responsibility of training journalists must ensure that they design programs that will improve professionalism, self-motivated journalists, and a high sense of ethical background. The government’s role in all this is not to regulate, but to invest in the training and retraining of journalists.

THE LEGAL SYSTEM The Zambian legal system imposes many restrictions on freedom of expression and of the press. Almost all the laws which seriously hinder on these freedoms were enacted during the colonial days. The main purpose of this colonial legislation was to suppress the African struggle for independence. This repressive legislation was not repealed at independence or at the dawn of political pluralism in 1991. (SADC Media Law: A Handbook for Media Practitioners; 2004, p, 76)

Zambia must begin to move from these unfavorable and undue restrictive pieces of legislation to a more sober, media friendly and supportive with minimum unnecessary restrictions.

The Zambian government must begin to respond and implement the many recommendations on media laws and reforms.

Zambia must begin to move from these unfavorable and undue restrictive pieces of legislation to a more sober, media friendly and supportive with minimum unnecessary restrictions. The Zambian government must begin to respond and implement the many recommendations on media laws and reforms especially the Sangwa Report of 2000. The Report remains one of the influential documents produced in the process of establishing freedom of press and the media in Zambia.

The Report recommended the formulation of information and media policy, the formulation of a single media code of ethical conduct, and commercialization of the national broadcaster and public owned newspapers. These recommendations led to the enactment of the Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA) Act, No. 17 of 2002, the Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation (ZNBC) Amendment Act, NO. 20 of 2002 and the establishment of Media Council of Zambia (MECOZ) in 2004

REFERENCES

Chanda, A., Liswaniso, M. 1999. Handbook of Media Laws in Zambia. Lusaka: Zambia Independent Media Association (ZIMA).

Chanda, A.W. 2002. Freedom of Expression and the Law in Zambia, viewed September 2008,http://www.zamlii.ac.zm/media/news/viewness.cgi?

Chirwa, C.H. (1997). Press Freedom in Zambia: A Review of the Press during the Five Years of MMD in Office, Lusaka: MISA-Zambia.

Kasoma, F.K.1986. The Press in Zambia. Lusaka: Multimedia Publication, Matibini, P. 2006. The Struggle for Media Law Reforms in Zambia. Lusaka: Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) Zambia.

Matibini, P. (2010). The quest for freedom of information law – the Zambian experience. Available on www.ajol.info/index.php/ldd/article/viewFile/54808/43296. Accessed on (1/2/2016/ 12:51AM).

Makungu, K. (2004). The State of the Media in Zambia. Lusaka: MISA-Zambia

McQuail, D.1994. Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction (3rdEd.).London: SAGE publications.

Mwanza, F.K. 1993.Chasing the Winds and Dependency Syndrome: Topical Issues on Zambia’s Political Economy.Lusaka: Management Consultancy Services.

Kabanda, S.( 2008). Know Your Constitution: A Collection of Articles on the Constitution of Zambia and its Reform Process. Ndola: Mission Press.

Kanene, O (2000). Election Reporting Handbook. Lusaka: Zambia Independent Media Association.

Kasoma, F.K.(1986). The Press in Zambia. Lusaka: Multimedia Publication.

Maimbo, G. J. B. (2001). Media Reform and Press Freedom in Zambia 1995-2001: A dissertation submitted to the University of Zambia in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of the Degree of Master of Mass Communication (MMC). Lusaka: UNZA.

Powers, D., Phiri, B. 2001. Plurality and Power Relations in Zambian Broadcasting viewed 12 january2016,

The Post, 2009. Editorial July 11, Lusaka: The Post. The Post, 2009. December 17, Lusaka: The Post. The Post, 2010. January 1, Lusaka: The Post. Times of Zambia. 1995, June 20, Lusaka: Times of Zambia.

Jesuit Centre for Theological Reflection (JCTR), (2011): Article on Preventing Corruption and Freedom of Information.Available on http://www.postzambia.com/post-read article.php?articleId=23701. Accessed on (1/2/2016/ 11:43AM).

Media Institute of Southern Africa. 2008. So this is Democracy? The State of media freedom in Southern Africa, 2008. Windhoek: Media Institute of Southern Africa.

Media Institute of Sothern Africa. 2008. A Quarterly publication of the Media Institute of Southern Africa Zambia Chapter.Lusaka: MISA-Zambia.

Media Institute of Southern Africa - Zambia Chapter, (undated) A Critical Evaluation of State Broadcasting in ZNBC and Recommendations for future Transformation Change direction.Lusaka: Media Institute of Southern Africa.

Menand,L.(Ed.)(1996).The Future of Academic Freedom.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Mullane,L.(2006).“Beyond basic: Applied research brings real‐world solutions to real‐world problems.”PublicPurpose(September/October),pp.2‐5.Online http://www.aascu.org/public_purpose/sept_oct_06.pdf.Accessed 21 June 2007.

Matenga, C.K. (2008). Political Economy of Foreign Aid. Lusaka: Co-op Printing

Walliman, N. S. R. (2001) Your Research Project : A Step-by-Step Guide for the First-Time Researcher by London: Sage Publications Ltd

Miles, M. B. and A. M. Huberman (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis2ndEdition Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers

Creswell, J. W. (2003) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approachesThousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

LisaM.Given(Ed.)(2008).TheSageEncyclopediaofQualitativeResearchMethods.Sage:ThousandO aks,CA,Vol.1,pp.57‐59 http://www.bdpressinform.org/rti.htm. Accessed on (2/24/2016, 09:00PM) http://www.foi.legislation.org. Accessed on (2/25/2016, 4:47PM)

(http://www.answers.com/topic/freedom-of-information-act-united-states#ixzz1kfeWvq6g). Accessed on (2/25/2016, 12:15PM)

APPENDICES

QUESTIONAIRE FOR REPORTER, EDITOR, AUDIENCE, AND REPRESENTATIVE FROM AN ADVOCACY INSTITUTION

SECTION A

GENERAL INFORMATION (Please tick in the space provided) 1. Indicate your age

a) 18-25 

b) 26-32 

c) 33-40 

d) 41 and above 

2. Indicate your gender

a) Male 

b) Female 

3. Indicate your marital status

a) Single 

b) Married 

c) Divorced 

d) Widowed 

4. Indicate your highest level of education

a) Primary level 

b) Secondary level 

c) College level 

d) University Degree level 

e) Post graduate degree level

5 What is your Religion? ……………………………………………………………………….

SECTION B

KNOWLEDGE OF THE INFORMATION BILL, PRESS AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

6. Is Zambia a democratic state?

a) YES 

b) NO 

7. Is an independent media a must for a democratic state?

a) YES 

b) NO 

c) NOT SURE 

8. Would you say freedom of expression and of the press go hand in hand with democratization?

a) YES 

b) NO 

9. How has the Zambian government been committed to a free and conducive press freedom in Zambia?

a) Very committed 

b) Committed 

c) Somewhat committed 

d) Not committed 

10. Is the media free and independent in Zambia?

a) Very Free 

b) free 

c) somewhat free 

d) not free 

11. Have you heard of freedom of information Act?

a) YES 

b) NO 

12. How useful do you think a Freedom of Information Act is to Zambia?

a) Very useful 

b) Useful 

c) Not useful 

d) Somewhat useful 

13. Is there any need of changing media laws governing freedom of Information?

a) YES 

b) NO 

14. If your answer in question 8 is YES state the reasons? ------

15. If your answer in question 8 is NO state the reasons? ------

SECTION C

ACCESS AND EXPOSURE TO THE MEDIA

16. Which among the following media is more convenient to you?

a) Television 

b) Radio 

c) Newspaper 

d) Internet 

17. Where do you have access to the medium you picked in question 16?

a) At a community center 

b) At a member’s club 

c) At a friend’s place 

d) At a work place 

18. How often do you access information using the medium you selected?

a) Very often 

b) Often 

c) Rarely 

d) Not at all 

19. Which one of the following best describes the persuasive power of the media in Zambia?

a) Very powerful 

b) Powerful 

c) Somewhat powerful 

d) Not powerful 

APPENDIX B

What is a Freedom of Information Act? Why is there lack of Freedom of Information in Zambia? Do you think a Freedom of Information Act can be a powerful tool for ensuring government’s commitment to openness, accountability and transparency?