Let me, from the onset of this submission, assert my bias towards legacy media - in particularly traditional broadcasting.
I am one of those who still enjoys watching the news on national television, an all time ritual that I sometimes cringe myself at.
Watching one of Africa's first television stations, the state controlled national television (ZTV) is something that raises a mixed bag of feelings in my being.
While I could possibly turn elsewhere for news and current affairs, like many others that have shifted their information consumption patterns, I am one of the few who still analyse the mind of state actors in a medium controlled by it.
My sense is we are many with that mindset. In my line of work, I get to articulate issues of national importance on ZTV.
Whenever I do so, family and friends alike advise me of it. With excitement.
Keep Reading
- Goshawks complete Currie Cup hattrick
- Kim Jayde revels in SA award nomination
- Dawson pleased with Sables’ progress
- Kadoma Hotel and Conference Centre home away from home
That some of them do so from the misinformed view that whoever appears on television is powerful and by extension has some extra coins, is neither here nor there.
The point is our broadcasting platforms, Zimbabwe's national television in particular still commands viewership and by extension national attention.
The same can be said of radio broadcasting. Perhaps with radio even more, given how empirically it remains the most widely accessed.
The entry of new players, including community and campus radio stations has in a way spoiled citizens for choice.
Plurality is the first step towards realizing diversity. Zimbabwe is at that elementary stage of opening up the broadcast sector, at this stage to actors linked directly or indirectly with the state.
This is however a secondary debate to this submission.
What is imperative is the existential threat of legacy media, broadcast media in particular.
To trace back to my initial shared inclination towards the national broadcaster, a pertinent distinction arises.
The distinction mainly arises from how I am accessing and consuming the national broadcaster's news. As I do the other local broadcasting content.
As with other modern day human beings, I access local content online.
Very few, if any of our local broadcasters are not online.
And herewith lies the first uncomfortable reality. The reality that the platform from which citizens are accessing local broadcasting content is that which both the broadcaster and regulatory authority have no control over.
So while there is benefit for local broadcasters to stream online and reach wider audiences, including the growing Zimbabwe diaspora, there's little evidence suggesting a return on this investment.
There is also content harvesting, where there's very little control over who uses locally invested content and if there is return on the same.
For example, content produced by local broadcasters can go viral not through platforms of their own but on harvested content.
In any event we don't own our Facebook or YouTube pages, even if these are in our names.
There's another uncomfortable reality of access to broadcasting services in the digital age.
Zimbabwe is yet to fully digitize and this affects the quality and reach of broadcasting services.
The cost of accessing the internet remains an issue, both on the supply and demand side, if we are to practically stream content online.
Infact, accessing the new television stations requires one to either be on Multichoice's DSTV or Azam TV, or otherwise have a settop box (STBs).
To this extent, there is cost to accessing television broadcasting. This has on its own sustained the myth that the country only has one television station. And this perception has become an uncomfortable reality.
Beyond the costs of accessing broadcasting services in the digital age, including the high costs of motor vehicle radio licensing fees, currently benefitting just the national broadcaster, there's the uncomfortable reality of regulating content standards.
In what I have been terming the influencer syndrome, there's an increasing trend of personalities growing bigger than institutions and the person becoming bigger than the fact.
The death of institutionalized broadcasting and the rise of personality based podcasting is an uncomfortable reality confronting broadcasting at the moment.
Not least because advertisers now prefer investing in these personalities and platforms than in institutionalized broadcasting outlets but due to the absence of standards among these larger than life personalities.
Even if they are working for a traditional institution bound by the regulatory authority, it is difficult to regulate influencers or enforce standards.
In any event, the influencer culture thrives not on mitigating information or ensuring quality. But on being outrightly crude, controversial and raw. This can be at the cost of cultural norms and value system.
Which leads me to the ethical challenges confronting broadcasting in this digital age.
While there is an appreciation of entrenching standards in regulating the use of Artificial Intelligence, there's a broader challenge in handling an emerging advertisers.
The evolved era has posed challenges on handling religious and medicinal content at a time that traditional businesses are closing down.
There is need to rethink broadcasting policy on multi taxation and the cost of doing media business.
We can't expect the already constrained sector to fund the broadcasting fund, in addition to other company and digital taxes.
The uncomfortable reality is that broadcasting is capital intestive and without an investment matrix to support broadcasters, we will be licensing new actors to fail.
Zimbabwe's broadcast sector's future is going to be hinged on reforming for relevance in the digital age.
There is need for an investment matrix for the completion of the digitization process and free supply of set top boxes.
The broadcast sector needs come up with a policy proposition for monetizing Zimbabwe's online content.
There is need to strengthen and standardize editorial policies in addressing the influencer culture and to protect the sector on the use of these by oligarchs.
Enacting the Media Practitioners Bill could also address the professional and ethical challenges confronting the sector and protect the information ecosystem.
All these policy interventions should be anchored on convergence. A converged regulatory framework will address multi taxation challenges and ensure the sector benefits from digital income.
The media as a public good has to be supported by public funds and the first step towards this investment model is the recognition that without this support, the media, particularly the broadcast sector can never on their own survive these seismic changes as a result of digital transformation.
That is unfortunately, the uncomfortable reality of the future of broadcasting in Zimbabwe.
Nigel Nyamutumbu is a media development practitioner serving as the coordinator of a network of journalistic professional associations and media support organizations the Media Alliance of Zimbabwe (MAZ). He made this submission at an annual Broadcasting Conference convened by the Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe (BAZ) and its partners. Nyamutumbu can be contacted on njnya2@gmail.com or +263 772 501 557