Every time I analyze a statement in the press made by a Zambian public figure, I always factor in errors by the scribe. Any literally piece put out is laced with a high dose of subjectivity. Even when one tries to reproduce a statement word for word, the possibility that the scribe edited out some parts that they thought were irrelevant, or an idea not properly articulated, is high. In essence, any reported item is subject to "the power of the pen." This as true in Zambia as is in America.
The article below is the best example of the obvious distortion of information by the reporter. I have dissected Kombe Chimpinde's article to show how long he'd been out to lunch. Read on...
UPND has not run out of options to win in 2011 - Mweetwa
By Kombe Chimpinde
Fri 24 Sep. 2010, 17:50
THE UPND has said that it has not run out of options to win the 2011 elections.
And the UPND has complained that they have sacrificed enough including Namwala member of parliament major Robby Chizyuka because of their commitment to the Pact.
Speaking when he featured on 'People’s Last Say' programme on QFM radio last night UPND deputy spokesperson Cornelius Mweetwa accused its partner the Patriotic Front (PF) of not being committed to the Pact that has been on the agenda of Zambians.
The foregoing paragraph is reporter Chimpinde's take on what Mweetwa said. It is supposed to be very clear in its construction. But as any language teacher would observe, it is long, winding, and poorly punctuated. I am not a language expert myself but I am always a sucker for a well written article. The italicized part of Chimpinde's sentence is likely to lead a reader to thinking Mweetwa is an object or is the partner of PF. A rational thinker would, however, know that UPND deputy spokes person Cornelius Mweetwa is not an object. Therefore the use of the word its in the sentence is a distortion. It may not be intentional but the totality of the errors in the opening paragraph reflects possible thinking impairment in the writer.
“What is happening in the Pact is not actually indisciplined. I think its lack of commitment within the Pact. I am saying this because indiscipline is when someone in the political circles is contrary to the party's position. When you walk out alone and say as far as am concerned I stand for something that is contrary to the party's position then you are said to be indisciplined. This we did in UPND when we expelled Namwala MP Major Chizyuka because he was taking a stance that was contrary to the party's,” he said.
In the above paragraph, I am assuming Chimpinde is transcribing the voice of Mweetwa on some contraption of some sort. I understand Mweetwa may have said "indisciplined," in place of "indiscipline," may not have used proper syntax when making his comments, but I think Chimpinde had time to insert proper punctuations in the sentence. I mean when you quote someone quoting someone else, you need to use appropriate punctuations to mark the beginning and end of the second quote. On this one, Chimpinde had been out to lunch for too long!
Mweetwa said that UPND expelled Chizyuka just to demonstrate their commitment to the Pact.
It is not clear whether it was Chimpinde's idea to use the wordjust or it was actually Mweetwa's. The use of the word "just" projects the simplicity of thought of the UPND party as a collective. Whether this was intentional on the part of Chimpinde or it was indeed Mweetwa's best choice of words, I am not sure. However, reading it the way it is written, I am made to think that the UPND departed from principle when it expelled its member just to demonstrate its commitment to the Pact. Such an action, in my view, is irrational.
“We had to lose an MP because we knew we were concentrating on a bigger picture, the Pact, because that’s what the people of Zambia want. We had to expel a member of parliament on that score now when people say Gary Nkombo is indisciplined he is a member of parliament and chairperson for energy in the UPND,” he said.
Once again, Chimpinde did a poor job reporting a spoken word. Chimpinde could have cut the sentences short to elevate the degree of clarity. This is because the use of the word because in the same sentence is permissible in speech but not in written.
“He was speaking as a member of the working group and in this particular meeting that took place that sanctioned PF's stand in Mpulungu and Chilanga to be contested by UPND. Gary was the secretary who was taking minutes of what was discussed.”
Chimpinde! This is not acceptable! Lunch hour ended yesterday.
He said it was astonishing to learn that PF general secretary, Wynter Kabimba, who was a senior party official in PF could come out and contradict the agreement s made at the meeting.
“...its lack of commitment because from what the general secretary of PF has said he has gotten full coverage and backing of his President Mr Micheal Sata in The Post and on Joy FM this morning. He (Sata) has covered him 100 per cent. He has also insisted that he (Wynter) is the voice for the central committee of PF, he has also joined in saying the working group is a smaller body and the decisions of working group. So now a senior party official getting the coverage of the president.”
What did Mweetwa say? What did Kabimba say? What did Sata say? And what did you, Chimpinde, hear?
He said the only explanation to PF’s behaviour was that there was no commitment on their part.
“...today PF has changed the stance cause the stance cause in the post Wynter Kabimba has said HH should forget about been President for the pact and on the other side on the radio and in the paper Mr Sata is saying Wynter Kabimba is the voice of the PF Central Committee which they have portrayed as been sovereign and beyond reproach they are a supreme beyond the working group or any marriage with UPND.”
I am going to assume, Chimpinde is a student on internship from a local college of journalism. This is not the way to write! Working with my assumption, I am going to place blame on the editor (of whatever prefix fits the job of looking through articles of interns before they are published). My question to the editor is, What the heck happened? Look at this paragraph! You can't let such poor pieces be put through for publication.
He further accused the PF leaders of not being sincere by indicating that Sata was ready to work under Hichilema.
There goes Chimpinde again. By stating that Sata was ready to work under Hichilema contradicts the insincerity that you are claiming Mweetwa had accused Sata of. Is it possible that you are distorting what Mweetwa said?
“So his voice is sanctified, it is a pure position of PF. So for the PF to insist that the two leaders have agreed to work under each other is not true, only HH has said he is willing to work under Mr Sata, and I heard myself,” he said.
Editor, don't you find this confusing
“So it no longer applies that Mr Sata is willing to be a vice-president to HH. The wrangle has nothing to do with HH, it has something to do with the working group and the failure of organisational consistency,” he said.
It could have sounded better had you, Chimpinde, inserted the word "its" in place of "the," between the words "and" and "failure." I did not mean to confuse the reader further. But the last part of the sentence should have read, "...working group and its failure to maintain organizational consistency." I will let you off on this because it may very well be what Mweetwa had said. But based on what I have observed so far, I cannot be sure.
He said PF was defending people who thought that each time they went to a meeting they got a fresh mandate.
“They failed to send people to this group who have to talk about Chilanga. The wrangle is about Chilanga but look in The Post and how Kabimba has gone far to disparage HH saying that HH should not think he will just walk into the PF -UPND Pact and take over the presidency the same way he walked in and become president for UDA( United Democratic Alliance.”
All Chimpinde needed to do here is apply proper punctuation and the reader would follow with great ease.
He said people should learn to put certain things in the past.
“HH will become president of this country one day which I believe he will, it will not be as a result of the wishes of Wynter Kabimba, neither will it be a wish of Mr Micheal Sata. It will be the wish of the people of Zambia who vote,” he said.
“... and people in Zambia in 2006 had indicated that they were willing to vote for HH, so there is nothing wrong with thinking that come 2011 actually many people who had promised to vote for HH will.”
I give credit where credit is due. This is a teaching moment for me. That is how you quote somebody, Chimpinde. Good job!
Mweetwa, however, said that it was possible for the two parties to produce one presidential candidate if they remained committed to the Pact.
“It is possible to produce one presidential candidate under the umbrella of the Pact but for us UPND we have not yet run out of options and ideas of our future and it is clear and bright.We are willing to contribute positively to ensure we bring about change,” said Mweetwa.
Apply proper punctuations, Chimpinde!
And during the same programme, Munali PF member of parliament Mumbi Phiri called in and maintained that it was impossible for individual parties to remove the MMD government.
“I am speaking as Munali MP representing the people of Munali. I can assure you that the Pact is not going to break. Those in the Pact that think they can go and stand alone are joking,” she said.
Phiri said she was hopeful that the Pact was going to hold and that only an insane person could think that either parties could go it alone.
“Let us keep praying am a woman of faith who believes in prayer and you know in a marriage they say a marriage that is criticised in the beginning comes out to be strong. I believe the UPND -PF Pact is going to stand until 2011 and that’s my prayer and I will not stop kneeling until this Pact works so that we can liberate this country. People are sleeping hungry, women are being raped, people are being killed. Can you imagine now corruption has even entered the mortuary.question mark here would have been better Where are we going as a nation?” she asked.
There is something seriously wrong with the first two sentences in the above paragraph; it distorts what is being said, not because of what is being said or how it is said, but how it is reported
“This country is not going anywhere so those who are joking let us get serious. I don’t think any sensible person can want to break the Pact and go it alone unless you are insane.”
I have always argued that that words are symbols of our thoughts. One can use different symbols to represent one's thoughts as long as one understands what those symbols mean. The variation of symbols is synonymous with language. It is clear that Chimpinde's mastery of the language he is using to report what he heard, or lack of it, is introducing distortions into the report. It is easy for an irrational reader to get inaccurate information from an article characterized by so much errors. Whether it is intentional or not, the mountain of evidence against the reporter suggests that he may be a major contributing factor to misinformation.
Such a poor piece of literally work emanate from many sources but a rational thinker. I therefore confer upon Kombe Chimpinde the Irrational Thinker of the Week Award.
No comments:
Post a Comment