Knowledge Mushohwe
Since its big entry after the demise of the Daily News, the online news market has grown even bigger. A mixture of credible information and wild allegations based on paper-thin bar talk theories greet online users on the Internet. Without doubt,

there is a lot of unreliable news on the web.
Members of both sides of the political divide have on numerous occasions sought to clarify or dispute information put on the web by either anonymous sources or people whose names no one ever heard of before.

Little is known about who funds online news sites or what their real intentions are, but they appear to specialise in presenting “secondary news” — information obtained from other news sources and repackaged into over-zealously extreme, blatantly biased pieces of information.
Its high time politicians and their parties realise that for as long as there is an unregulated online media space that publishes anything and everything, there will always be a vacuum of credible primary information to counter the petty and sometimes annoying heresy on the same platform.

For starters, the Zimbabwe Government needs to have an up-to-date official website.
Government has so many ministries and many more decision makers that it is difficult for the ordinary citizens to know who to address in case they have unsolved problems. A government website that lists contact details, spells out the role of each member and explains the official lines of communication would help the general public to understand legislative matters and the relationship between politics and general issues.

The two main political parties have websites, but they both act as nothing more than a “Google search” of political news favourable to them from local newspapers or online sites.

There is little or no space for information on the parties’ political ideologies, policy-making and implementation, or important announcements.
The MDC-T party could use their official website to clarify their position on the land issue, after all the contradictions reported in the media since its formation in 1999.

Zanu-PF could use theirs to explain the indeginisation drive they are spearheading, because for the most part readers or viewers see only numbers — such and such percentage and so and so billions of dollars. But no one is there to explain how such a move can benefit, say a working class family man that rests only on Sundays for a paltry monthly pay.

The best bit about a big party’s website is that it is official communication on behalf of millions on members, so any pronouncements carry more weight that views and opinions of any one party member.
Even if very damaging, malicious fabrications were to be published elsewhere on the net, or even in the traditional news sources, readers would be wise enough to check the official position if available before they can jump to any conclusions.

In today’s world, traditional newspaper readership and local television viewership is declining while online access continues to grow.
For politicians, the net is a rally with millions of potential voters. It is a virtual place that is frequented by a sizable number of stakeholders in Zimbabwean politics.
Neglecting such a big number of online users would be nothing short of suicide. The numbers are definitely there on the web, and ‘junk’ information is also there in big numbers.

Politicians need to guard against becoming irrelevant, like the online sports section of the ‘pink paper’ that still leads with stories written well before the 2010 World Cup when Carlo Ancelotti was still managing Chelsea.
The individual politicians can do more by communicating with members of the public through facebook or their personal websites. Currently, only a few politicians such as Walter Mzembi and Nelson Chamisa are active members on social networking sites.There is twitter and blogging too, web spaces where they can speak their

mind on whatever topic that may be of interest to them and the public.

That way, there is little chance of either getting misquoted or the public believing a deliberately twisted piece of news as the direct information would be available on a space specially sanctioned by an authoritative member of society.

A Google search of one’s name under ‘news’ would show all the most recent information about the person published online, and it takes very little time for a politicians to write a few words in relation to whatever may have been presented to the public.

Today, news is no longer about waiting for ZTV cameras or conversing with a nodding journalist with a notebook only.
International media houses continuously find ‘leads’ in public utterances by public figures made available on the internet. The public figures also find that form of communication convenient because regardless of how much ‘spice’ is added to what they may have said, their original statements are also a matter of public record and my be accessed by anyone with a computer and a modem.

Since the turn of the century, Zimbabwean politicians have been complaining about misinformation and complete fabrications by the Western media. Yet, instead of personally putting up information that ‘sets the record straight’, they fuel speculations by ignoring the online public that is bombarded by the ‘frivolous and vivacious’ news on a daily basis.

The interactive nature of the internet allows for instant feedback and continuous sharing of ideas between political figures and the public and may be a good barometer to gauge civic perceptions on important matters such as the all important question, ‘Will I get reelected in the next elections?’
It is about time for all, including politicians to embrace the internet so the false and malicious information out there becomes irrelevant, based on whatever the public is likely to get from ‘the horse’s mouth’.