I have been following with keen interest the unfolding public spats between a section of Zimbabwean musicians and the mainstream collective management authority, the Zimbabwe Music Rights Association (Zimura).
The debacle, whose side shows have been of high entertainment value, particularly to followers of podcasters - has morphed from being merely interesting to the public to being of public interest.
For context, the crux of the dispute for a section of the musicians affiliated to Zimura revolve around legality, legitimacy and alleged misappropriation of funds.
The leadership of Zimura on the other hand contend that there is a smear campaign to malign the organisation driven by commercial interests, disgruntled members and a rival collective management authority.
Zimura further argues that most musicians — the members and owners of the organization are unaware of changes to their founding documents and to the powers vested with the board.
To this extent, Zimura argues — the section of the musicians and the media that challenges the legality and legitimacy of certain decisions by the leadership are misinformed and emanate from the old statutes of the organisation that have been reformed.
Naturally, when there's a litany of allegations and various constitutions of the same organisation flying around, the truth becomes the greatest causality.
This submission does not, however, seek to discuss the merits and demerits of the warring factions to the dispute neither does it seek to establish the truth.
- Gokomere school head succumbs to pressure
- In the groove: Has inflation hit the music markets?
- I use hammer, chisel for survival: Sculptor
- Suspected Copper cable thieves nabbed
Keep Reading
Rather, the submission seeks to make three fundamental points on how the Zimura saga is a public interest manner that public protecting bodies should take a keen interest on.
My contribution to the public discourse on this matter will also contend that the lawsuit by the Zimura board chairperson Alexio Gwenzi against journalist and podcaster Plot Mhako amounts to what defenders of the media term "Strategic lawsuits against public participation" or SLAP.
For starters, Zimbabwean citizens have every right to know, not least in terms of Section 62 of the constitution and the Freedom of Information Act but on the basis of enhancing transparency and accountability in how funds, resources and operations that are held in the trust of the public are handled.
This is why it is a function of the law that private organisations make their financial reports public.
Beyond financial reports, it is actually a weakness of the Freedom of Information Act to restrict access to information to public bodies when several private entities carry out public functions.
This is why it is disingenuous for Zimura to publicly posture as a purely private organization, only accountable to its members - yet on the same fora agitate to have a share of the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation (ZBC) tax.
Yes, there's a legitimate claim by Zimura of how their members are being owed, by an equally struggling media sector and that there should be strategies to address this concern.
Beyond the debts, Zimura does have other legitimate concerns, some of which emanate from technological disruptions and gaps in the copyright legal framework.
But such concerns don't warrant the organisation to operate as a closed entity - immune to public scrutiny on how the organisation is changing how it operates to adapt to these contextual changes.
Which brings me to my second point of why the Zimura saga is of public interest — the generality of the citizenry are among the organisation's key stakeholders.
The music industry is a cultural enterprise that exists beyond the commercial interests.
Our languages, existence and spirituality are preserved by our music as produced by Zimura members.
It thus becomes a concern when at every given point — at least within the podcast shows, press conferences and interviews I have followed — there has been minimal information disclosure to the public.
In most forums, questions around how much revenue was collected and the allocation of resources was at best generalised by Zimura and at worst sensationalised by the disgruntled musicians.
It is common cause that the sensational information is the one that trends and gains public traction — something that could have been avoided with enhanced transparency.
Which leads me to my third and final point on the role of the media and the shameful threats of increased cases of strategic lawsuits against public participation as exhibited in the response by Gwenzi.
Before I discuss why I am persuaded to cite the Gwenzi case as a SLAP, I will unapologetically stand in solidarity with all journalists and the media that brought to life certain issues that were obtaining within such a critical body.
It is indeed in the public interest for journalists and podcasters at it to investigate stories and put them in the public domain.
Especially when there's a news lead and in this case serious allegations of funds mismanagement or misappropriation.
Yes, this doesn't grant journalists and the media the license to misrepresent facts, to carry allegations as the gospel truth or to publish unverified information.
There are certainly ethical parameters and professional codes of conduct that guide the operations of the media.
In the same vein, there are professional mechanisms that hold the media accountable and ways in which the media can rectify issues when they get it wrong.
Power, in all its manifestations prefers stiffer mechanisms and punitive measures when the media gets it wrong - to the extent that such measures stifle journalistic enterprise.
The commonly used way to stifle journalistic enterprise as a way of silencing dissent or covering up issues has been criminalisation.
But given how arrests of journalists - though still being practiced - is now relatively archaic, new strategies are being deployed.
One such being flooding media enterprises or journalists with lawsuits that discourages pursuit of a matter of public interests or that drags them financially, emotionally and even physically.
Commonly referred to as a SLAP, these lawsuits often send a warning across the media divide on the impact of reporting on certain subject matters.
In the case of Gwenzi, of course it is within his rights as a citizen to approach the courts on account of him feeling defamed - something that the courts will determine.
But there's every reason to take his case as one of SLAP just by merely ascertaining the power relations, therein, between him as a news source implicated for wrong doing and a journalist in pursuit of a story.
Worse, the threat of the lawsuit was served at a time when the disgruntled musicians had scheduled several protests activities, that should have been in the hope of the adversary camp gone underreported or not given prominence.
The journalist served with the lawsuit, Mhako — himself now a subject of a litany of allegations from Gwenzi, runs a relatively small media enterprise, whose cost on time and legal fees will cripple operations.
Now, at a time when the media is grappling with monetizing the online space and encouraging entrepreneurship for journalists survival, it is regrettable to have bearers of influence and power targeting the shrinking and/or closure of critical voices on account of unnecessary lawsuits.
Lies have short legs — and if indeed journalists got some facts wrong, the prudent response is to lay the facts and the truth will stand.
At the end of the day Zimura needs all media and there should still be discourse between the media and the organization when the disputes are off the public domain.
Obviously, the public discourse and social media trends are going to cool off and even die down. One hopes by then there will be sanity in the engagement of Zimura and its members, stakeholders, the media and the generality of the public.
*Nigel Nyamutumbu is a media development practitioner serving as the coordinator of a network of journalistic professional associations and media support organisations the Media Alliance of Zimbabwe (MAZ). He can be contacted on [email protected] or +263 772 501 557
