SECTOR 2 From my experience, I have not seen anything other than a relationship with the shareholder.” “I haven’t had a phone call to tell me to drop a story. I have conversations with politicians, yes. But at the end of the day, it is up to the editor to make the decisions.” One panellist posited that a distinction would have to be drawn in terminology. “It’s an issue of defining interference as opposed to general bias or even selfcensorship.” An example provided was that “when the President fell at the airport, NewZimbabwean.com and all other media houses reported on the fall. But The Herald said he broke the fall. Pictures were published online, (The Herald’s reported that he had fallen), and the chief photographer’s pictures were deleted.” Another example noted was that “when an editorial appeared in The Herald referring to the then presidential affairs minister (Didymus) Mutasa as a dwarf in giant’s robes. The editor of the paper, Caeser Zvayi was suspended for a month for this.” Some panellists noted the interference is not only from government. However, it also stems from companies who use their advertising spend to influence editorial content. Scores: Individual scores: 1 Country does not meet indicator 2 Country meets only a few aspects of indicator 3 Country meets some aspects of indicator 4 Country meets most aspects of indicator 5 Country meets all aspects of the indicator Average score: 30 AFRICAN MEDIA BAROMETER ZIMBABWE 2015 2.4 (2012 = 1.5; 2010 = 1.1; 2008 = 1.1; 2006 = 1.0)