大象传媒

I personally wouldn't say you should focus on other stories to the detriment of Zimbabwe, it is an important story of great interest to this country. With only limited time in the bulletins it probably is right that Zimbabwe takes priority over things like Somalia simply becuase it is of more national interest. IMO you provide excellent coverage and 大象传媒 News does a very important job for Britain and the world. HOwever, you should be trying harder to bring unknown stories to the nation aswell.

What I always find confusing and fairly annoying is that there is 大象传媒 News 24 (or whatever it is called now) and yet all the reporting on the channel over 24 hours could be put into a few minutes. IMO there is far too much repetition on the channel and it would serve the public much better if it also covered the lesser known stories such as Somalia and brought them to the attention of the general public. There is plenty of time to do it and as mentioned in the blog, there are correspondents available.

The 大象传媒 has a massive network of reporters and is also able to use its reputation to share resources with other networks and work together. So why does it seem that some correspondents go weeks/months without really doing anything? Why does it seem that just a handful stories are chosen and then everything else is ignored? I hope it is not simply down to trying to save money.

I think the radio does do a slightly better job, perhaps because it is not as obsessed with ratings and trying appeal to as wide an audience as possible. However, there is still a lot of repetition despite there being quite a lot of time to cover lesser known stories.

So yes, continue to cover Zimbabwe but don't think there is no room for other stories because of it. The 大象传媒 has a wide range of resources and TV and Radio (and online) and you should be finding the room to cover the stories such as Somalia. Even if it is only a small amount of coverage. Delivering the news, both well known and unknown, should be at the core of the 大象传媒, it is good at the moment but there is room for improvement.

I for one think we have had far, far too much regarding Zimbabwe. Doing part of the news for the few days around the election there was ridiculous. Your fooling yourself if you think that millions of people have or feel a connection to this country.
In previous years when you have swamped us with news of white farmers I have had discussions with friends in the pub and we all agreed that we did not think it should have been covered on the news.
Your program should become far more Eurocentric, we are constantly bombarded with news or so called news from the US. (Doubtless you have some sort of financial arrangement with one or more of the US broadcasters to explain why so much meaningless trivia makes it on to our screen from there.) Where as many important stories from across Europe (which is after all OUR continent) are never touched upon and when you finally do get over your fixation with all things American you cover a remote country in Southern Africa!
So please, please please, stop listening to your aged governors, the colonial times are long since dead, and I doubt if any more than 5 to 10 per cent of your audience cares at all what happens down there. If you are using your so called Audience feedback polls to convince yourselves that this news is wanted can I remind you that these are always carried out in London (with a majority immigrant population) and do NOT reflect the views of the country as a whole. London, 大象传媒 journalists will be amazed to hear, is not the whole country.

It might be that time restraints of broadcast news means you have to give priority to specific "breaking" news.

Especially since Zimbabwe, for better or for worse, is "current" news - the maneuvering over the polls is "new", whilst things like Darfur and Somalia are "the same" each time.

But - you have the website, which isn't subject to the same "space" restrictions.

The regional areas (all regions, not just Africa) could be expanded so stories that don't make it to broadcasts can be covered.

The question would have to be: Is the website considered a duplicate of broadcast news, or a way to expand far beyond its limitations?

Just a short one - Zimbabwe is on the edge of a precipice now, whereas Somalia and the Sudan are in more static states, awareness and pressure from the rest of the world now can make a difference. I don't think you cover zimbabwe too much, I still log on every day to find out if the election results have been released, and the situation could well change day by day.

I think it is important to have a broad coverage of world events.
The problem I see Zimbabwaean coverage is that Mugabe is pretty much seen worldwide as a despot whose time has come and the media are hovering round waiting for him to fall; change is always exciting and it takes on the aspect of a morality tale.

It might be an idea to have an African news digest (and one for Asia, Eastern Europe, S. America etc) as a regular segment on News 24 so those that do have an interest can catch up there and stories tracked more consistently. On the main news bulletins just tell us the most pertinent facts: there鈥檚 been an election, if and when he goes and what the outcome is etc.

I have problems with the way all channels cover world news coverage. Too often conflict, turmoil and disaster produce good TV pictures (鈥業f it bleeds, it leads鈥� to use an American term.); my complaint is that once the shooting/disaster relief stops the cameras move on to the next conflict leaving us in the dark as to what is now happening.
Too often a story like Zimbabwe takes up news time at the expense of other countries and stories. Drought and famine have returned to Ethiopia for example, but you鈥檇 never guess it from the mainstream news.

America is obviously still the main major world power, but I suspect the attraction of the extensive coverage of, say, the Obama/Clinton contest is that:
a) They speak English ~ our continental neighbours don鈥檛.
b) Things American tend to make suspenseful drama (elections, trials etc).
But do we really need so much blow-by-blow coverage? It could be argued that the reality of world affairs means that it鈥檚 now just as important to know of developments in Russia, India, China and Brazil; not just endless reporting every time there鈥檚 a bomb blast (daily it seems) in the Middle East or Obama/Clinton make a speech.
Europe tends to get coverage when a country has an election, but there鈥檚 little follow though once the result is known.

World new reporting will always be a tricky juggling act I know; but I object most to the 鈥榓mbulance chasing鈥� aspect that seems to dictate the importance given to a news story.

I think Zimbabwe deserves every ounce of coverage you are giving it. Two thumbs up to you.

Zimbabwe is a country full of potential....this can be realized faster with maximum media coverage. It's easy for people to forget about African countries in crisis if they aren't reading about it in the news regularly. Once people forget, that country becomes even more isolated. As you know, media is a powerful force as it exposes governments and people's willingness (lack of) to 'do the right' thing; this exposure puts pressure on them to help and this help is what Zimbabwe needs. This country isn't too far gone to rebound relatively quickly, the more the world knows this, the better chance of the international community sticking by Zim with their support.

Exposing Souther African leaders painful silence on the Zim crisis would be effective. It isn't just Mugabe-it's an entire old boys club down there, plotting and scheming. This needs to be clear to the rest of Africa and the world.

Please keep the coverage up. It doesn't matter WHY you are giving it more coverage than other countries. The point is that what you're doing will eventually contribute to a change in Zimbababwe-bringing it back to what the people need and deserve. Your coverage equals more hope for the incredible people of Zim. My boyfriend lives in Zimbabwe and he is incredibly excited and grateful that the world is watching closely-he feels this will contribute greatly to a faster change.

Keep the momentum up.

Rather than why does the 大象传媒 devote so much attention to Zimbabwe, I think the question should be: why does the rest of the media, and world, care so little? Is it a sort of racism of low expectations?

I find it shocking that the mainstream media in the US has not emphasized it more. It is not "politically correct" to show the problems that have arisen since colonial rule has ended in Africa.

Perhaps more emphasis should be placed on other areas of conflict. But I agree with some of the other posters that it should not be at the expense of this extremely timely situation. Zimbabwe has been a disaster for a number of years, but what we have now is democracy being stolen - right this minute - from brave citizens who have stood up for law and freedom. That is a story worth covering.

For the sake of the people there, and in fact the rest of Africa, this despot needs to leave. And it evidently won't happen without raising awareness outside of Zimbabwe.

Undoubtedly, Zimbabwe has received a disproportionately high amount of coverage by the 大象传媒, compared to other African countries with severe strife, e.g. Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia etc. But the really important issue is not the extent of the 大象传媒's coverage of Zimbabwe. Instead, it is the accuracy of the 大象传媒's reports in pointing out all the factors behind Zimbabwe's economic and social collapse. Yes, a huge (probably most) of the blame lies with Mugabe - and he should have stepped down many moons ago. But the 大象传媒's coverage (notwithstanding inevitable time constraints) shorthands the issues behind Zimbabwe's collapse to the point of absurdity; e.g. casually dropping in Zimbabwe's tragic average life expectancy figures (less than 30 yrs for men, and 35 years for women) into its narrative about Mugabe - but failing to point out that life expectancy has crashed due to an AIDS/HIV epidemic rather than Mugabe's undoubted mismanagement. Similarly, the 大象传媒 has not once pointed out that successive droughts over the last five years have been a hugely important factor behind Zimbabwe's economic collapse. Nor does the 大象传媒 ever highlight that Zimbabwe's economic malaise also owes alot to being cut off from IMF and World Bank assistance since the mid-1990s, largely at the behest of the USA and UK, who have always detested Mugabe for his Lennist/Marxist leanings. In short, portraying Mugabe as the only cause of Zimbabwe's meltdown belies the 大象传媒's deserved reputation for providing informed analysis to its customers. Rectify it.

I know many Zimbabweans that are now living in England, the UK and around the world due to the state of the country. I think for anyone to sit here and say there is too much coverage and that people in this country dont want to hear about it, is quite ignorant.

Many innocent Zimbabweans have lost their lives, not for anything illegal but for something as simple as making a cross on the Opposition parties box. How can anyone say that is not news or not important?

I am sure the majority of Zimbabweans would move back there in an instant if the country wasnt the way it is now. How would you feel having to leave the only home you know because there isnt any food, water, electricity or basic living standards?

I hope there is more on Zimbabwe, the world needs to know what Mugabe is doing to his supposed fellow countrymen, women and children.

Of course 大象传媒 does not place too much emphasis on Zimbabwe. Where on the planet will you find a country with such a high inflation figure? Where on the planet will you find a country with such a low life expectancy figure? Fellow comrades, this is a rogue nation defying the norms, Zimbabwe is worthy of all the attention it gets.

Whilst I understand that the 大象传媒 is trying to remain unbiased in its media coverage by trying to appease everybody, I find it difficult to believe that some of the comments made here make reference to a disproportionately high amount of coverage on the crisis in Zimbabwe.
The fact that the 大象传媒 is banned from Zimbabwe - doesn't this strike a cord in people to ask -why is that?
Hence, any information that the 大象传媒 can gleam is important in trying to expose the evil dictator Mugabe and his henchmen. The more that the 大象传媒 and other news channels expose on the Zimbabwean crisis the better chance that there is for the SADC countries to apply pressure to Mugabe to leave office.

In fact we could say that Zimbabwe is on the brink of a genocide - much like that of Rwanda. I recall the world saying - we will never have another Rwanda! Well unless some radical intervention occurs in the next few weeks Zimbabwe will become another casualty in Africa. It is easy for some Westerner to sit at his computer and make comments about a situation which they actually have no concept of - torture, starvation, supression. Of course this does not interest people who have never had any form of hardship in their life.

This crisis in Zimbabwe has gone past colonialism and the fact that Britain helped put this Mugabe in power in 1980. It is now about trying to save ordinary people who want freedom in their land to make choices that most people take for granted and especially the poor helpless rural people of Zimbabwe who have nothing much in their lives ( a mud hut and some livestock) yet are receiving abuse by Mugabe for the simple fact that they put a tick in the wrong box!

It is criminal that the madman Mugabe is still in charge of a country with so much potential and that was previously a good example for Africa. What has been destroyed in a few years will probably take twice as long to rebuild. However, Zimbabwe is on the brink of no return - possibly to become another DRC - hence the importance for coverage and for the leverage to try and remove Mugabe once and for all.

Many, many people DO care what happens to people living under a dictator who for one reason or another they can do nothing about. People who are undernourished and morally broken do not have the strength to go out on the streets and demonstrate; certainly Zimbabweans are nowhere near as well off as those we saw during the Orange Revolution. Mugabe would be quite sure to turn his guns on demonstrators if they attempted in any meaningful way to try for real chinja/change.
i) A previous blogger was wrong with his life expectancy figures; it has been regularly reported that life expectancy in Zimbabwe for women is 34 years and for men, 37 years. .
ii) The high death rate due to AIDS and AIDS-related diseases has been due in the main to the non availability of healthy foods and the lack of retroviral drugs; both these factors due, in turn to high inflation, drastic downturn in the ability of the Zimbabwe government to deliver adequate healthcare, and a general breakdown in employment due to Mugabe鈥檚 maniacal tendencies.
iii) Droughts have not occurred in succession over the past five years, but seed and fertilizers and agricultural equipment have not been available鈥攐nce more due to ZANU PF incompetence.
iv) The reason the IMF and World Bank cut off assistance was due to the Zimbabwe government having failed to meet the repayments to these two institutions.
v) No use hanging the Lennonist/Marxist label on Robert Mugabe鈥攈e can鈥檛 even be a true communist. He鈥檚 just a cruel and greedy dictator, interested only in feathering his own nest and the nests of those who do his bidding, keeping him in the all too comfortable lifestyle to which he has become accustomed. As far as he is concerned his people are of little consequence; didn鈥檛 one of his ministers say: "We would be better off with only six million people, with our own [ruling party] people who supported the liberation struggle. We don't want all these extra people."
Zimbabweans need us to care. Good on you 大象传媒, keep flying the flag for the downfall of the dictator.鈥�
Ruthamidthealiencorn

Surely the interst in Zimababwe over Somalia is that the latter was always a very poor country. By contrast, at the time of independence, Zimbabwe was the second richest country in southern Africa. It had a sophisticated economy and was a net exporter of food and other agricultural products. Zimbabwe achieved this despite suffering years of economic sanctions, and was well placed to become a real post colonial success story.

After a decade and a half of total mismanagement, made worse by a policy of systematic reverse racism against the white farmers, Mugabe has thrown away that inheritance, and left his people facing ruin. The misguided policy of giving land to people who had no clue how to farm it is irreversible, and it is difficult to see how the country can recover its former wealth.

The collapse many European countries and return to barbarism when the Roman Empire fell can hardly have been more dramatic.

That is the tragedy of modern Zimbabwe. Somalia had little choice but to be poor. Zimbabwe could have been wealthy but Mugabe deliberately took that chance from his own people and impoverished them.

Most of British people have come home from Zimbabwe still have friends and family living in terrible conditions and need to know and be told what is happening there.
As many of us were born in Southern Rhodesia. and that Country belonged to Britain, surely there should be more coverage on the truth. What really worries me is that the grandchildren of these early settlers arn't allowed to return to their true Home Country, where their roots are.

News about elections are being published showing that violence is happening now that opposition is probably the winner of the elections. This extreme situation deserves a careful coverage of events, I would think.

I applaud your coverage of Zimbabwe. There is a significant number (hundreds of thousands) of people in the UK who have direct connections to that country (unlike, for example, Somalia). It is therefore newsworthy.

At the time of the election leading to independence in 1980 there was significant intimidation by Mugabe's people. The British interim authorities did nothing at the time because they wanted to wash their hands of a troublesome colony. Having let Mugabe get away with stealing that election, it is laudable that British institutions try and rid the country of him. The 大象传媒's coverage helps to expose this tyrant for what he is.

Zimbabwe coverage has been about right. It is a sad story that many people are following. The first 10 years or so, people had hope that Zimbabwe would continue to be a successful nation. Then, all of a sudden, President Mugabe seemed to have lost all reason and the nation has fallen to a low rarely seen. 1/3 of the population has left. Predicting what will come next isn't easy. All the makings of a good news story that many people want to read about.

By keeping the news spotlight on Zimbabwe, and constantly reporting your findings to the world community, the 大象传媒 is in effect keeping countless Zimbabweans alive.
Witness the effect of the public outrage regarding the Chinese Arms shipment.
We now have major powers calling for an arms embargo!
It is when no one is looking and no one is reporting, that country's slip into the darkness of a Rwanda- where almost a million innocent people where murdered in 100 days.
Don't stop 大象传媒.
Human lives are at stake!!!

No, there is not too much news. We may be impatient that there are not enough breakthroughs every day, but this is Africa we are talking about.
When I was seven years old my family had to escape from a South African country and come home to the UK before any armed militiamen could kill or harm us. So please don't think, Marcus of Webmail, that colonial times were dinky fun, they weren't. They could be very dangerous.
We have to keep up pressure to stop black people from attacking black people who belong to the same country.
That is why the 大象传媒 is there. That is why we need the news.

Zimbabwe is at a critical stage in its existence. The decisions and actions taken there in the next few weeks will play an active role in shaping the future of Africa and the future of how we deal with conflict in Africa.

You can't give this enough airtime.

Forgive me a second comment.
Judging from many of the comments above; many have deep commitment to seeing change in Zimbabwe (My personal feeling is that the sooner Robert Mugabe goes the better and I hope his replacement sincerely has the Zimbabwean people鈥檚 interests at heart.); but they wish to see the 大象传媒鈥檚 coverage as part of an engine for change. They have a partisan interest in the outcome.
The issue becomes one of: 鈥榠s the 大象传媒 (and world media) reporting events or should it become a participant in them?鈥� An agent of change. And does coverage reflect a simple desire to inform or a desire to influence events?
That question can be applied to every event, issue and all media outlets.
But it is a question that strikes at the heart of news coverage. Are you reporting, or aiding an 鈥榓genda鈥�? Should the stasis in Zimbabwe take precedence over the plight of other nations ~ Ethiopia for example? And if so why?

You are right to question Zimbabwe鈥檚 prominence. I hope those questions will continue to be raised, in many circumstances and with many countries, for many years to come.
Comment 3 said: 鈥渢hings like Darfur and Somalia are "the same" each time.鈥�. That isn鈥檛 true, things are changing, evolving; change is constant. But without reporting how will we know that? And do we understand why things are they way they are in those countries?
And to ask a question of the Zimbabwean democracy supporters above; why should Zimbabwe get more, or less, coverage than Tibet or Ethiopia?

Good luck Alistair with the decisions you make; at least you鈥檙e asking questions; that shows integrity. But please news editors stop chasing the most televisual pictures (Ambulance chasing.) or human interest stories. News priorities do seem to be determined by 鈥榟ave we got pictures?鈥� 鈥楢re they dramatic?鈥�, regardless of the their global importance that day.

Isn't it fairly easy to determine people's interests? What stories are people reading on your website? If there's more interest in Zimbabwe news than Somalia (or any other African country) doesn't that answer your question?

I have nothing but gratitude for the extent and currency of 大象传媒 coverage of Zimbabwe! I live in Shanghai and have only recently been able to access the 大象传媒 website regularly. It is now my main source of daily news. As a former regular visitor to Zim, who feels deeply for the plight of its inhabitants, I want to know every twist and turn in this harrowing story. I am praying that the tyrant, Mugabe, will finally release his stranglehold on the country so that it can return to prosperity. After all, the country has some of the best agricultural land in Africa plus one of the most dramatic tourist attractions in the world (Victoria Falls). That one greedy man can bring it to its knees is a major tragedy.

I agree with "Tzunoch " and I also thank 大象传媒 for all its coverage. This coming from a family that has also had to leave the lovely country due to all its hardships.

Zimbabwe as it stands is an unpredictable drama. Robert Mugabe has broken every law in existence including his own. Everyone is waiting to see what happens next.

Will Mugabe announce he is president again? Then what will MDC and the International community do?

Will MDC push forwards, what will ZANU PF do?

If MDC takes over, what is to become of Mugabe?

Will the situation deteriorate into civil war?

Will Mbeki finally speak out? And SADC actually take a stand?

Will the UN intervene?

Are we going to see another episode of Rwanda?

These are questions many of us with family or friends still currently living in Zimbabwe are asking constantly. Many people in Zimbabwe are currently relying on the 大象传媒 for true coverage of whats going on since the only newspaper available is state run and full of propaganda.

Zimbabwe is important since people there are being denied the right to choose their leaders. In fact, according to the latest recount polls, MDC is winning while ZANU-PF [Mugabe] loses.

I must say considering the following issues:

Iraq
Afghanistan
Myanmar
Sudan (Darfur)
Somalia
Kosovo
US Presidential Elections
Kenya Post-Election Violence

I fail to understand how Zimbabwe can supplant all the preceeding countries in importance, unless there is a secondary agenda -- unrelated to the claimed objectivity of the "state-owned" 大象传媒.

I hope that the more experienced reporters at the 大象传媒 realize that Zimbabwe has been at the "precipice" of disaster for 8 years now. This is the longest decent into chaos in the history of mankind. As a frequent African traveler I feel safer in Zimbabwe than I do in South Africa. However, to be fair, the inflation rate and its basis is certainly noteworthy and is clearly a major concern. However, the 大象传媒's stories on Zimbabwe often provide misleading information that is subsequently contradicted. Such an approach undermines the top billing 大象传媒 provides to stories about Zimbabwe. As a practical example, the frequent report that Morgan Tsvangirai received 50.3% of the vote is not supported by the numbers the MDC itself provides -- where are the 大象传媒's calculators?

As another example, I would hope that the more seasoned 大象传媒 reporters would recall that the person who motivated their banning from Zimbabwe (Jonathan Moyo) is now a person they frequently interview for insights about Zimbabwe. Why don't they ask MP Moyo about this issue?

I have a video tape with title "Robert Mugabe15.4.79 Part 1" on the side of the box. Box is five and a half inches square whatever that is in new money. box seems to suggest that the tape is a Sony Video Tape (high density) for helical scan video recorders. Also a panel shows V-60H. We may like to see what Mr M was up to in 1979. What should I do with this tape?

Please continue reporting on Zimbabwe, maybe give it slightly less space. To leave some to other undemocratically elected leaders and systems. I say systems of power, as many realize old Mugabe has probably lost quite some real grip, yet others are there behind.
Less stress on him alone may help. Indicating the real names and armor of those who count in the regime can be heavier, but a resident would fear, we expect the 大象传媒 not to.
Too much stress on Zimbabwe as you are British? Rightfully so, but you also appreciate your site is, for us all in the world who understand most words scribbled in the old Albion idiom, THE NEWS. We rely on it. I mean, it is the world language, you are increasingly not just a British source anymore.
I listened to you in Uganda , on the world service, 25 years ago. It was my way to know where to be, and what to do to avoid the worse. Yes the day we were whiskered out of Uganda the road was blocked as the British convoy had to pass first, your guys were there to protect British Citizens and the Italian embassy cars were stuck up somewhere. Somehow of course we all accept a UK point of view on the world's information site.
I personally see your position, yes, quite idealistically, as one who can change Africa a lot, for the better.
No local radios, exit polls or other checks on faked democracies in the die hard dictatorship. Yet no one can block the 大象传媒!
Somalia is no dictatorship, it is sheer chaos. So talk a lot on the other failed elections, that would help more.

I appreciate your keeping Zimbabwe in the news.... I log on every day just to check what is going on 'back home' My life now is in England but my heart is still in Zimbabwe... a lovely land and lovely people brought to their knees to feed the ego of one man, Mugabe! A wonderfully fertile land and yet the people are starving....life expectancy the lowest and unemployment rife.... Yes keep up the good work and God bless Zimbabwe.....

i thank the bbc for covering zimbabwe i am a young zimbabwian still living here in zim and i think it is great that the rest of the world is hearing about our problem the only thing is the world just seams to be listening and nothing is happening it has been a month since our election which many of us could not participate in due to our skin colour or belifes which i thing is sad we all hope and pray for change but hope is running out and still the world watches

our inflation rate is alot higher then officialy stippulated (100 000 %) try more along the lines of 500 000%

i read one of the comment about zim having droughts and aids but people also forget the stress factor there are guys dying around us as young as 25-35 of heart atacks due to the stress levels in this country
yes we have had droughts but that is no excuse our so called new farmers are not interestted in producing for the nation it is all subsistance farming if you can even call it that i drive past many farms every day on my way to work in harare and farms that used to get awards for production are left fallow for over 3 years now
all the land was allocated to the top boys who want to sit in town there is no compasion for their fellow man
it is a true case of the rich get richer and the poor must just die to leave more money for the top dogs but any way thank you bbc you give us zimbabweians a glimmer of hope that maybe some one out there might give us a helping hand and return zim to the country it once was

The coverage is great. It sends Mugabe into orbit. For that alone - keep it up. People are being tortured, raped, starved and intimidated whilst we agonise over the amount of coverage Zimbabwe gets. Bizarre. It is within our power to halt this mass murder. The leaders of the world need to strap on a pair and stop dithering. Mugabe is an 84 year old wizened little geriatric. Any human rights abuses are worth as much coverage as they can get. Thank God for 大象传媒 and the media.

The world has almost come to a stand still because of Sir Robert Gabriel Mugabe and his failure to acknowledge and accept defeat. Typical of war veterans isn't it? Now, lest we drift from real truth, the question of whether Mugabe should relinguish power in a more civil way and usher in someone who is (land ) user friendly remains to be understood. We wish for extensive investment by both locals and outsiders, but that is not to say that the country should be free for all.There is a great cry by Western countries to cut down on immigrants and I sincerely am unonmously behind any such scheme that will give more room and say to the natives of any land under the Sun whether it has more oil, oxygen or any special substance that supports life. YES! let bad rulers be booted out, but there should be no decolonisation tendencies behind the screen. There can never be satisfaction obtained from human rule because it does not belong to earthling man who is walking even to direct his steps. In a nut shell, what I'm saying is that East,West, South, North, there is bound to be complaints of rulership be it left or right wings, democrats, conservatives or republicans. The price we are paying for disillusionment is the fact that we've had to depend on fellow humans instead of the God who created the Heavens and Earth. He is the ONLY one who is going to set matters straight at his own opportune time. He sent his only begotten Sun onto the earth to come and die for our sins, but humanity in general has refused to accept this plain fact. There is a price that each and everyone of us will pay for subjecting God's creation to such tumoil.
Nobody is above the Law of Jehovah God.

Alistair Burnett makes the rather ridiculous statement; 鈥淢any observers fear Zimbabwe is in danger of becoming a failed state. At what point is total failure finally going to be seen as failure? Mugabe inherited the Jewel of Africa and turned it into a sewer. Within four short years of taking control he had managed to reduce Zimbabwe to the state Zambia took twenty-five years to achieve.

Others talk of Zimbabwe heading toward genocide. How many more tens of thousands of people does Mugabe have to kill for this wanton destruction of human life to be seen for what it is 鈥� GENOCIDE.

Following the shooting down of an Air Rhodesia Vicount in the late 鈥�70鈥檚 and subsequent slaughter of the survivors, the Dean of Salisbury (Rhodesia) preached a sermon entitled, 鈥淭he Deafening Silence.鈥� The furore, threats and posturing by Western authorities and ignorant do-gooders failed to see the slaughter of innocent whites by black terrorists as a crime worthy of comment or condemnation.

Once again the silence is deafening; Western authorities, especially the British, and the throng of ignorant do-gooders have fallen silent in the face of Zimbabwe鈥檚 genocide and the wanton destruction of a once beautiful and prosperous country.

Why? The problem, as I see it, is that the likes of Peter Hain and his band of communist sympathisers are too proud to admit they were wrong. They fought so hard to get Mugabe into power, even using the same tactics to get him there as he now uses to hold on to power.

It is interesting that the West fails so spectacularly to see what Mugabe is doing as racism and ethnic hatred because it is primarily black against black. The likes of Hain must be hauled before the International Criminal Courts to stand trial beside Mugabe for this genocide. Their hands are soaked in blood, a guilt no amount of lying or ignoring will ever expunge.

I am no expert on the issues in Zimbabwe or Somalia, have no personal interest in the region. However, I am still following the events that have been reported in Zimbabwe, and am deeply concerned at the situation in the country. It is really important the media devotes attention to the situation so that the world can take notice and mobilise to help the suffering people in Zimbabwe.

However, I also believe that the reportage should be balanced, as there does not seem to be any justification for ignoring the plight of people in Somalia.

The question of whether media reportage is balanced is in fact a much wider issue. Currently the weight given to different stories does not reflect their significance. For example, in recent days the 大象传媒 has reported that Wesley Snipes has been sentenced to 3 years in jail because of tax evasion. Is this really news?

I would also like to add that the reporting on Zimbabwe does not address some crucial issues. While there does not appear to be any doubt that Mugabe has been terrible, I have not read anything to indicate that the opposition leader is any better. Shouldn't this be debated? For all I know the opposition leader could be worse than Mugabe. Perhaps it is obvious that he will rebuild the country? As I mentioned earlier I am no expert on Zimbabwe, but it seems very strange to me that there is no discussion of the relative merits of both candidates.

I welcome all news about Zimbabwe and have been watching the whole sorry story unfold.

Perhaps the saddest thing is that if we had been better informed some months prior to the election then greater pressure could have been applied to African Union members to ensure accurate and speedy results that could not be overturned, manipulated or queried by any of the political parties.

Thabo Mbeki may have achieved a huge step forward by getting Mr Mugabe to allow the MDC some access to the media prior to this election and he also deserves praise for ensuring the lack of violence and harassment of voters before March 29th.
As the former colonial power in Zimbabwe we must, as a nation, take some responsibility for the demise of this country - we signed the Lancaster House agreement and, in doing so, agreed to assist in it's reformation.

Claire Short's letter to the Zimbabwean government in 1999 may have stated the Labour government's position at that time but by African standards it was rude and inflammatory. It was considered by many Africans to be a complete abdication of duty regarding the issue of land reformation.

This in turn gave Mr Mugabe the perfect opportunity to instigate the farm invasions and curry favour and kudos with both his cronies and the african political media as he took land away from "the colonial whites" and gave it to black Zimbabweans (who just happened to be staunch Zanu PF supporters !). The demise of Zimbabwe's economy has taken 8 years and has been in freefall for most of that time.

I very much hope that Zimbabwe remains on all the news channels until this poor country gets a government that puts it's own people first. The British government owes an apology to the Zimbabwean people for having helped to inflame the situation and has a duty to help put the country back on it's feet.

I can't believe we are being asked to comment on the obvious! Of course there is too much reporting on Zimbabwe and most of it embarassingly biased. For those who know little of Africa might be led to believe that there are only a dozen or so countries on the continent. The exposure Zimbabwe receives is unwarranted and unnecesary. I am Zimbabwean and at times I can't believe the rubbish 大象传媒 comes up with. You mentioned Somalia as a country with major problems, but there are lots of countries which have serious issues and could do with highlighting. And ZImbabwe's problems are nothing like Somalia's. DR Congo, for example, hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, maimed or displaced but there is very little coverage. uganda, which Brown happily visited a few months ago, has a virtual dictatorship with political parties virtually banned. Whereas in Zimbabwe, elections take place regularly and opposition parties are not banned. It's not the duty of Zanu(PF) to support their opposition. Most opposition parties in Zimbabwe tend to be immature and myopic, its therefore little wonder they fail to attract followers.

Every Zimbabwean obviously wants change but its not the 大象传媒's place to become virtual spin doctors for MDC and Tsvangirai. It also doesnt help to continually blame Zimbabwe's economic woes on Mugabe when everyone knows there were always cracks in facade. Rhodesia was under sanctions for years, so Zimbabwe's economy started on the wrong foot. And contrary to the oft said assertion that ZImbabwe was Africa's bread basket, there has always been problems with drought and ZImbabwe's main export, tobacco was facing decline due to the anti-smoking campaigns world-wide. The economic structural adjustment problems didnt help either. As for the farm invasions, the govt did not start or encourage them at first. Mugabe only condoned them when he realised that he was losing control over his former freedom fighters, the war vets under CHenjerai Hunzvi! If 大象传媒 must insist on reporting on a country you can at least try to get your facts right!

Contributors on the many, many blogs and have your say forums spout the usual nonsense about how many people have been killed in Zimbabwe, I seriously wonder how much they really care. For starters, most of the figures are not correct and secondly many people are dying in the real conflict zones like Chad, Central African Republic, Eritrea, etc and yet you don't get the same level of sympathy or coverage.

The level of interest and hate for Mugabe fuelled by 大象传媒 articles unfortunately distorts everything and helps noone. Whether 大象传媒 likes it or not, Mugabe was and still is hugely popular. Perhaps if you limit the amount of exposure, he will fade into the background.

The matter is not that you report on Zimbabwe too much. What IS the matter is that yes, you do report too little on other countries in crises. But more than that, 大象传媒 reports too little on a number of other issues; this is not limited to sociopolitical themes.

I am not saying report less on certain topics, like Zimbabwe. I am proposing that you publish more content on more topics.

I judge the 大象传媒 to operate the highest standard online news site of all regarding quality of reporting, your coverage is as always up-to-date and well supplied with related links to relevant background research and so on.

However the one point of criticism relates precisely to the issue at hand - a very narrow focus on only a handful of stories at any given time. Currently one such is Zimbabwe, which raised the question you posed in this blog. This evidenced by the very small number of links under the various headings.

I realise that you strive to keep your news homepage layout as clear and elegant as possible. Unfortunately as a result this forces you to make editorial decisions of what to place prominently based on space and layout constrains that are too restrictive, resulting in quandaries like "Are we giving too much coverage to Zimbabwe?"

Simply create spaces for the other stories that you surely do have.

It surprises me how easily it has been forgotten that Rhodesia was a British colony and that thousands of young men willingly gave their lives in two World Wars to help the motherland enjoy the freedoms she has today. It surprises me that people (even Germans) have the audacity to write to 大象传媒 and complain of too much coverage on Zimbabwe. Thank you 大象传媒 for the great coverage and for acknowledging that we were once part of (the empire) you enjoy today.

From an exile who needs a visa to brieflyvisit UKrelatives.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

As a person living outside the UK, I don't really listen to The World Tonight, but I rather watch 大象传媒 World News channel and read 大象传媒 News online. However, I've also noticed that the Zimbabwe story is covered very extensively by the 大象传媒 - more than by any other media that I have contact with. On one hand, I can see this problem that Mr Burnett is referring to in his entry to the blog. Africa is full of untold stories and Somalia is indeed one of the best examples.

But on the other hand, in my own country - Poland - the coverage of Zimbabwe is very modest and it's in fact mainly thanks to the 大象传媒 that I know what's happening there. I appreciate that.

It is surely the duty of a journalist to cover every story as comprehensively as possible until the story's dead, i.e. when your readers and listeners get bored.

Your question, "are we giving too much coverage to Zimbabwe?" is therefore absurd. Judging from the Have your Say column, the Zimbabwe story is still highly popular.

However, in answer to the question behind the question: yes, your coverage is flawed and losing credibility. The 大象传媒 claims it is banned from reporting from Zimbabwe; it can therefore be suspected of having a grudge against the regime or of some other bias. You don't seem to have much access to the regime leadership, so your reporting is necessarily one-sided. Just about everything I read on Zimbabwe from the 大象传媒 is somehow embarrassing to the regime or the president.

Judging from the most recommended Have your Say comments you are successfully reinforcing the prejudices of your readers: Africans can't govern themselves, wasted aid, corruption, I told you so. This parochial outlook is all very well for the outraged of Tunbridge Wells, but is bound to lose the credibility of a wider audience.

In general your coverage has become lazy and repetitive. Reporting in Africa focuses a great deal on victims鈥� access to hospitals and refugee camps is easy. The victims are powerless; the reporter excites pity and shame while wearing a humanitarian halo. Aid agencies benefit.

Who, what, where, how has become cheap. As to why, I'm none the wiser.

Behind the suffering there's power, money, strategic interests, race, international diplomacy. What are the motives and true interests of the African leaders and elites? How much are they really in control? Who benefits and how?

And there's more to the reporting of international diplomacy than the equivocal broadcasting of soundbites, platitudes and public statements.

I feel your coverage of Zimbabwe is shallow. It needs more intelligence and analysis of the issues and better contacts with those with the power to make news. It is is supreme interest to the Southern half of Africa, the Rhodesian/Zimbabwean diaspora and to all those interested in colonial and post colonial history.

Yours, in an armchair, Geneva.

There are a latge number of Southern Africans of all races in Britain so it is natural that the 大象传媒 covers Zimbabwe a lot as it is of interest to them. The coverage has further created interest in the wider public.

However i think the 大象传媒 should give more coverage to other troubled countries in order to put Zimbabwe in percpective.

Darfur has received a lot of publicity, but Somalia much less so even though UN officials say the humanitarian crisis in Somalia is worse than that of Darfur.

The ongoing conflict in Kivu region, Democratic Republic of the Congo, is claiming 45,000 lives each month, and yet it gets almost no coverage in 大象传媒 news.

What is happening in the Ogaden war in Ethiopia?

What about the wars in Myanmar against ethnic groups in the border regions?

What about Nagorno Karabakh, Abkhazia, Western Sahara, Chad?

I think that, as the UK does have close historical links, it is incumbent upon the 大象传媒 to focus on Zim rather than other crises in Southern Africa. This is because in today's wired world it is the job of those with the greatest affinity to a story that can give it the greatest contextual depth; stories from elsewhere can be covered in greater depth by others - it is not difficult for most people these days to pick and choose their media sources.

I would suggest that those people that have posted complaining about the quality of 大象传媒 reporting on Zim should go and read, watch or listen to coverage from elsewhere, which really has been sensationalist and simplistic.

Current affairs programs have to simplify the context - there have been some excellent programmes elsewhere on the 大象传媒 covering the history of Rhodesia and Zimbabwe, looking at every viewpoint.

I worked in Zimbabwe for several years, and am extremely interested to see what is happening there. It is a human interest story - the descent into hunger and squalor of one of the most beautiful and proud countries of Africa and the hope for an end to greed and dictatorship - but I do think that is has become a cause celebre for the 大象传媒, a little like its single-handed liberation of Kabul. There are other countries in Africa, and perhaps more 大象传媒 attention on Zimbabwe's neighbours - Mozambique, Botswana, Zambia - might do more to encourage their leaders to put pressure on Mugabe.

Social injustice and human rights violations anywhere in the world deserves as much media attention as possible, as this gives rise to awareness of what is happening and adds to the upswell in the voices for freedom and justice for all people.

Those who do not have the freedom to put their mark on the ballot paper for fear of torure and death depend on those who are able to enjoy those freedoms, to put pressure to bare on authorities in their own countries. I applaud the 大象传媒 for taking this responsibillity seriously and urge them to continue to do so.

20 000 Ndebele speaking Zimbabweans were murdered by Mugabe in 1982/83. Thousands more have been beaten within an inch of their lives, especially around election times, since 1980. Thousands of Youths have had their minds poisoned with "mbanje"(cannabis) and propaganda whilst under the tutalege of Zanu Militia Commanders, and are then armed and urged to carry out Mugabe's murders, rapes and beatings. This is a deplorable situation which no right minded person should abide.

It is indeed timely that Zimbabwe should feature so prominently in the media, as much as it may be a disturbing reminder to those who would rather bury their heads in the sand and hope that it goes away, that the United Kingdom was instrumental in placing Mugabe where he is - in a place where abuse of his power is counted in dead bodies.

Instead of complaining, those who believe that the 大象传媒 are taking too much time to report on the situation in Zimbabwe should hasten the end of Mugabe's tyranny by lending their voices in indignation. There are many petitions that can be signed to do this.

At the same time the 大象传媒 ought to bring to the attention of it loyal audience other instances of injustice and cruelty, meted out by criminals and evil politicians in every part of the world, so that we can all be involved in improving the plight of the down-trodden, where ever they may be found.

I can see one justification for the Zimbabwe emphasis. There are substantial numbers of Zibabwe refugess in the UK - as you say it was a colony. I can see that this makes the story of interest both the refugees and also to indiginous population interacting with the refugees. Basically you have a directly interested audience for Zimbabwe reports.

I think the attention given to Zimbabwe is good enough and called for. This is a situation that has just emerged and if not given the attention it deserves might get out of hand. Situations like this should be h ighlighted so that the people involved are kept on toes and therefore will act. If we do not follow up then there would be reluctance to solve the crisis. I agree it's not Zimbabwe only that needs attention but right now it is the worst and is already in a precipice. If the crisis in Kenya was not highlighted there wouldn't have been a quick solution. I think we should get more on the situation till we see some tangible long lasting solutions from the Zimbabwe government.

The problem is not that you under-report Somalia...its that you your Somalia reporting is one-sided.

The 大象传媒 execs need to do an investigative look at their own Somalia national staff and their biases.

大象传媒 reporters consistently write against the Transitional Government and they hide facts that would embarass the Islamist insurgency.

The most recent example: The British-Somali school teacher killed last week in Somali was killed by Islamists because he was a Christian convert, not because his school was a meeting place for elders as the 大象传媒 reported.

On top of that, the story of these killings by Islamists could not even be found on the 大象传媒-Somali page.

Someone in charge over there at 大象传媒 please wake up! Either teach your Somalia reporters about journalistic neutrality or hire pro-TFG reporters to balance out your pro-Islamist reporters.

大象传媒 could only seem to be fair on the Zimbabwe issue, if it could give its audience the real facts of the case. How it gives little coverage to failed zimbabwean asylum seekers suffering in Britain, while advocating democracy in Zimbabwe is surprising.
I worked within the refugee support organizations and never had i seen any white zimbabwean seeking asylum! Some Zimbabwean asylum seekers are denied fair hearing at Immigration tribunal for lack of credibility even if the 大象传媒 is full of chaotic life in Zimbabwe!
If the BBc wanted really to take a media cover out of Africa, it would go to Gabon where Omar Bongo has been president for almost 30 years, to Cameroon where Paul Biya has just modified the constitution to remain president for life after serving for more than 25 years, to Congo where Sassou Guesso is still president haven served, gone, and felt a bit nostalgic of the power he was missing, to Togo where Eyadema served more than 30 years and passed it over to his son at his death, then To Equatorial Guinee where Theodoro Obiang Nguema is becoming a king! now that's just for little Dictatorial examples, add to that areas of serious crisis like Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan, Democratic republic of Congo, Central African republic, Chad, Niger...And Zimbabwe. We are fed up been told what is going badly where 大象传媒 chooses in Africa, only to be called liars by the British Home Office immigration case workers.
Africa can not be in troubles all the times through 大象传媒 and be in peace when its people come knocking; those Zimbabwean and pro african sympathizers who think that the 大象传媒 is really raising awareness for African good, should think again.

Is there any transnational or international agent watching closely with a neutral eye the recount of elections in Zimbabwe? Is African Unioor UN doing this? Is there a process that guarantees to everybody in the world that the recount is being made accurately? Are partial results being made public as the process pregresses? When is this process predicted to come to an end?

In this day and age, with 24 hour news stations (both TV and radio) and the largest, most respected news website in the world, it is inexcusable that the 大象传媒 still conforms to the outdated method of reporting only on the "hot" stories.

There is plenty of space on the website and the News24/FiveLive schedules to give to those stories that are no longer "hot" ... like Darfur, like Somalia, like the desperate plight of those in other nations, such as Sierra Leone, etc.

Instead of 24 hour news coverage, all I see is 1 hour of news coverage repeated 24 times until a new "hot" story breaks.

That is not just a problem for the 大象传媒, Sky News is just the same, but with much greater emphasis on being the first to break the new "hot" story. I do, however, expect the 大象传媒 to take more of a lead in these things.

There are a lot of Zimbabweans living in the UK and people living here who have family or friends in Zimbabwe. It's never been easy to get news about Zimbabwe. Phoning is difficult (our family there have a landline which has not worked for about 18 months - no-one seems to know how to fix it). One carefully words 'e' mails in and out of the country to avoid any problems for friends/family there - so please continue to report on what's happening! -

What is the latest news on the ship carrying arms to Zimbabwe? Has it left the area of Southern Africa without unloading it's cargo?

diddleate, the ship returned without unloading the cargo, a major victory for SATAWU.
I see nothing wrong in the Beeb emphasizing Zim in its' coverage; like it or not, the human rights and democracy aspects make it a live story, to say nothing of how ZANU-PF managed to turn one of Africa's most stable economies into a basket-case within 2 decades

I think the reason why Zimbabwean issues are overemphasized is that a numerous number of people are suffering because of one person who is stubborn and doesn't want to move away from power. Zimbabwe has a potenital of recovering economically as it was once a thriving state and its problems need to be sorted out before they go further or the situation deteriorates whereas Somalia has experienced wars and riots for a long time. It can take a lot of time for Somalia to recover as a result the situATION IS OUT OF control and the life is normal for som of the Somalian citizens. It is good and safe to solve a problem while it is still on its earlier stages as the saying goes "strike the iron while it is still hot".

thanks for the bbc giving it time and resources to cover the situation in zimbabwe....