ABSTRACT

The 2018 presidential and parliamentary election in Zimbabwe was unique in that it was the first post-Mugabe election and the government had pledged to deliver a credible election free from the previous trappings of violence. This study uses framing theory to understand the actors, topics or issues and the media frames used in The Herald and NewsDay newspapers. This research adds knowledge to the vast literature on media coverage of politics in Zimbabwe by interrogating how the media framed the 2018 elections in a new political environment. Results show that despite the new political environment and legal provisions on how the media should cover elections, polarisation in the media along political lines has remained, and this is noted as a stumbling block to democracy in Zimbabwe. On the issues covered, it has been shown that NewsDay prioritised strategy issues at the expense of substantive issues while The Herald presented substantive issues from the perspective of political leaders. The conflict frame is the most dominant frame used by both media. In view of this, the article argues that such approaches in politically charged situations have the potential to entrench divisions, which may escalate to political hatred and violence.

摘要

2018年津巴布韦总统选举和议会选举的独特之处在于，这是穆加贝之后的首次大选，政府已承诺进行可信的选举，摆脱以往的暴力陷阱。这项研究使用框架理论来了解《先驱报》和《新闻日》中的演员，主题或问题以及媒体框架报纸。这项研究通过询问媒体如何在新的政治环境中构架2018年大选，为津巴布韦的政治媒体报道提供了丰富的知识。结果表明，尽管有了新的政治环境和有关媒体应如何报道选举的法律规定，但媒体仍沿政治路线出现了两极分化，这被认为是津巴布韦民主的绊脚石。关于所涵盖的问题，事实表明，《新闻日》优先考虑战略问题，而以实质性问题为代价，而《先驱报》从政治领导人的角度提出实质性问题。冲突框架是两种媒体使用的最主要的框架。有鉴于此，该文章认为，这种在政治上受到指责的情况下的做法可能会加剧分裂，这可能会升级为政治仇恨和暴力。