Even though corruption by politicians and in politics is widespread worldwide, it is more pronounced in developing countries, such as Zimbabwe, where members of the political elite overtly abuse power for personal accumulation of wealth. Ideally, the news media, as watchdogs, are expected to investigate and report such abuses of power. However, previous studies in Zimbabwe highlight the news media’s polarised and normative inefficacies. Informed by the theoretical notion of deliberative democracy developed via Habermas and Dahlgren’s work and Hall’s Encoding, Decoding Model, this article uses qualitative content analysis to examine how online readers of Zimbabwe’s two leading daily publications, The Herald and NewsDay, interpreted and evaluated allegations of corruption leveled against ministers and deputy ministers during the height of factionalism in the ruling party (ZANU PF). The article argues that interaction between mainstream media and their audiences online shows the latter’s resourcefulness and, at least, discursive agency in their engagement with narratives about political corruption, itself an imperative premise for future political action.
ChristiansCGGlasserTMcQuailD, et al. (2009) Normative Theories of the Media: Journalism in Democratic Societies. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press.
CompagnonD (2011) A Predictable Tragedy: Robert Mugabe and the Collapse of Zimbabwe. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
10.
DahlgrenP (2005) The internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication22(2): 147–162.
11.
DahlgrenP (2018) Public sphere participation online: The ambiguities of affect. Les Enjeux de l'information et de la Communication19(1): 5–20.
12.
DiamondLJ (2002) Thinking about Hybrid Regimes. Journal of Democracy13(2): 21–35.
13.
DriskoJMaschiT (2016) Content Analysis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
14.
DruckmanJNNelsonKR (2003) Framing and deliberation: How citizens’ conversations limit elite influence. American Journal of Political Science47(4): 729–745.
15.
EcoU (1972) Towards a semiotic inquiry into the television message. In: MillerT (ed.) Television: Critical Concepts in Media and Cultural Studies. London: Routledge, pp.3–19.
16.
FiskeJ (2010) Introduction to Communication Studies. London: Routledge.
17.
GastilJ (2008) Political Communication and Deliberation. London: Sage Publications.
18.
HabermasJ (1989) The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
19.
HabermasJ (1992) Further reflections on the public sphere. In: CalhounC (ed.) Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp.421–461.
20.
HallS (1978) Encoding and Decoding in Television Discourse. Birmingham: Centre for Cultural Studies.
21.
HeywoodP (1997) Political corruption: Problems and perspectives. Political Studies45(3): 417–435.
22.
HoyM (1992) Bakhtin and popular culture. New Literary History23(3): 765–782.
MabweazaraHM (2014) Readers comments on Zimbabwean Newspaper websites. Digital Journalism2(1): 44–61.
27.
MabweazaraHMMareA (2021) Participatory Journalism in Africa: Digital News Engagement and User Agency in the South. London: Routledge.
28.
MabweazaraHMMuneriCTNdlovuF (2020) News media capture, relations of patronage and clientelist practices in Sub-Saharan Africa: An interpretive qualitative analysis. Journalism Studies21(15): 2154–2175.
29.
McChesneyRW (2015) Rich Media, Poor Democracy: Communication Politics in Dubious Times. New York, NY: The New Press.
MakombeR (2018) Framing corruption narratives in Zimbabwe: A critical review of the ZIMDEF corruption scandal as Portrayed in Zimbabwean Newspapers. Journal of African Media Studies10(1): 73–86.
32.
ManosevitchEWalkerD (2009) Reader comments to online opinion journalism: A space of public deliberation. Paper presented at the 10th International Symposium on Online Journalism, Austin, TX.
33.
MatheLCaldwellM (2017) A content analysis of readers’ comments on political and economic news articles from Zimbabwe Online Media. Journal of Communication8(1): 56–68.
34.
MedardJF (2002) Corruption in the neo-patrimonial states of Sub-Saharan Africa. In: HeidenheimerAJJohnstonM (eds) Political Corruption and Contexts. London: Transaction Publishers, pp.379–402.
35.
MedvicSK (2001) Political Consultants in U.S. Congressional Elections. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
36.
MooreD (2020) Robert Mugabe’s Legacy: Coups, Conspiracies and the Conceits of power in Zimbabwe. London: Zed Books.
37.
MoyoL (2010) The dearth of public debate: Policy, polarities and positional reporting in Zimbabwe’s News Media. In: MoyoDChumaW (eds) Media Policy in a Changing Southern Africa: Critical Reflections on Media Reforms in the Global Age. Pretoria: UNISA Press, pp.110–132.
38.
MoyoS (2014) Corruption in Zimbabwe: An examination of the roles of the state and civil society in combating corruption. Available at: https://core.ac.uk/reader/42136480 (accessed 03 August 2020).
39.
MunoriyarwaAChambweraC (2020) Twitting the July 2018 Elections in Zimbabwe. In: NdlelaMNManoW (eds) Social Media and Elections in Africa: Theoretical Perspectives and Election Campaigns. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.75–96.
40.
MunyongaA (2019) Sanctions or corruption? An analysis of the missing link as Zimbabwe’s second republic gears for vision 2030. In: DuriPTMarongweNMawereM (eds) Mugabeism After Mugabe? Rethinking Legacies and the New Dispensation in Zimbabwe’s Second Republic. Masvingo: Africa Talent Publishers, pp.408–443.
41.
NdhlovuMP (2020) Examining media discourses on religious rape in Zimbabwe. Feminist Media Studies20(6): 801–812.
42.
NielsenC (2012) Newspaper journalists support online comments. Newspaper Research Journal33(1): 86–100.
43.
PapacharissiZ (2009) The virtual sphere 2.0: The internet, the public sphere and beyond. In: ChadwickWHowardPN (eds) Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics. London: Routledge, pp.230–245.
44.
PapacharissiZ (2016) Affective publics and structures of storytelling: Sentiment, events and mediality. Information, Communication & Society19(3): 307–324.
45.
RawlsJ (1999) The Law of Peoples with “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited”. London: Harvard University Press.
46.
RobertsD (2018) Getting what they deserve: Digital media comments on the cause of detroit’s bankruptcy. In: DobrickFMFischerJHagenLM (eds) Research in the Digital Age: Ethics for Social Sciences and Humanities in Times of Mediatization and Digitalization. Weisbaden: Springer, pp.108–110.
SantosPNdhlovuMP (2016) Media as political actors in times of political crisis. In: MukhongoLLMachariaW (eds) Political Influence of the Media in Developing Countries. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp.25–44.
49.
SilvaMT (2013) Participation and deliberation: A case study of readers comments to news stories on the Brazilian presidential campaign. Comunicação e Sociedade23: 96–109.
StarkeCNaabTKSchererH (2016) Free to expose corruption: The impact of media freedom, internet access, and governmental online service delivery on corruption. International Journal of Communication10(2016): 4702–4722.
52.
SzeftelM (1998) Misunderstanding African politics: Corruption and the governance agenda. Review of African Political Economy25(76): 221–240.
53.
Transparency International (2020) Corruption Perceptions Index 2019. London: Transparency International.
54.
Van GorpB (2007) The constructionist approach to framing: Bringing culture back in. Journal of Communication57(2007): 60–78.
55.
Wahl-JorgensenK (2019) Questioning the ideal of the public sphere: The emotional turn. Social Media + Society5(3). DOI: 10.1177%2F2056305119852175.
