Indigenous language newspapers in Zimbabwe: Kwayedza and Umthunywa and the struggle for survival

Introduction

There is a voluminous body of literature on the media in Zimbabwe (see Chuma 2008; Chibuwe 2016; Mano 2005a; Mazango 2005; Moyse 2009). However, this work has been mainly concerned about the mainstream English language media, both electronic and in print. Specifically, the focus has been on the media in the context of Zimbabwe’s politics, economy and culture, especially post-2000. The Zimbabwean political-economic-socio-cultural crisis of post-2000 spawned much academic work in media, national identity, elections, governance and politics (see Mano and Willems 2008, 2010; Chimedza 2008; Chasi 2008; Ndlovu-Gatsheni and Willems 2009; Moyse 2009). Equally, despite social media being a relatively new phenomenon, there is a burgeoning academic emphasis, especially on social media and politics in Zimbabwe (see Moyo 2009; Mare 2016; Chibuwe 2016; Mano and Willems 2008, 2010; Ncube 2019). However, despite the indigenous press having been around for some time, there is ironically not much literature on indigenous language media (print, broadcasting and online) in Zimbabwe compared to English language media. Kwayedza and Umthunywa were both founded in 1985 (Telephone interview with Kwayedza editor, 5 March 2019), but Umthunywa folded in 1993 and re-emerged in 2004 (see Mabweazara 2007). Kwayedza has been in circulation for thirty-four years whilst Umthunywa has been in circulation for a combined twenty-three years. Despite this long history, there is little academic work on these two indigenous language newspapers (see Mabweazara 2006,2007; Mpofu and Salawu 2018a, 2018b). Indigenous language media have arguably been marginalised in academic research. As a result, there are fewer studies on these two indigenous language newspapers compared with the numerous studies focusing on the English language dailies - the Daily News and The Herald and other mainstream English language newspapers. But Mpofu and Salawu’s work in recent years has prompted a steady increase in studies of indigenous language media in Zimbabwe (see Mpofu and Salawu 2018a, 2018b, 2018c). These studies, together with Mabweazara’s (2007) work, tend to be either audience-centric and/or text-centric.

This chapter adds to this growing body of literature. It complements the existing research by adopting a decolonial turn and critical political economy

(CPE) approach to interrogate the survival of indigenous language media. It goes beyond merely exploring their sensationalism and how it impedes development communication to examining the strategies the two newspapers have deployed to remain afloat. In effect, even mainstream English language media, both local and global, have deployed infotainment techniques to remain economically viable (see Murdock and Golding 1997). The chapter seeks to understand how the two newspapers have, among other strategies, used indigenous languages - which are widely viewed as the reason the newspapers ‘are not popular’ - to gain competitive advantage over the English language media. This is crucial for two reasons. First, in the Zimbabwe All Media Products Survey (ZAMPS) results for 2018 - and the contested nature of ZAMPS results notwithstanding - Kwayedza came in second to The Sunday Mail in the weeklies category, out-performing a host of English language weeklies in the process. Second, the assumption that indigenous language media perform poorly has always been faulty (in the case of Zimbabwe), given Radio Zimbabwe’s status as the leading radio station in the country (see Mano 2005b). Radio Zimbabwe uses the indigenous Ndebele and Shona languages. This chapter debunks the myth that indigenous language media perform poorly and are excluded from development communication (see Mpofu and Salawu 2018a, 2018b).