By By Ross Moyo
Studio cameras
The Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe (BAZ) has urged Responsible Broadcasting upholding National Values as real indicators for press freedom, media reform, and political accountability. This was revealed in its latest Statement despite critics arguing the country’s broadcasting laws remain old and repressive, designed for an era of state monopoly over information. BAZ ought to adapt to the realities of digital expression instead.
Zimbabwe Online Content Creators is amongst journalists and content creators BAZ is urging to “familiarise themselves” with the Code of Conduct.
The Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe has been lambasted for making this statement in an effort to silence dissent and shielding the political elite from public scrutiny.
Some analysts bemoaned that the Southern African nation is still pushing its outdated and authoritarian approach to media regulation, which is tantamount to not protecting content creators—but rather as selective application of the law.
The Broadcasting Authority has therefore made a move to regulate and stop any Social Media Dissent, a move widely seen as another assault on free expression, by targeting digital content creators and online platforms. Commentators confirmed it as nothing more than a renewed attempt to muzzle dissent and tighten state control over public discourse.
Some analysts believe these bureaucratic jargon about “national values” and “responsible broadcasting,” is BAZ’s latest statement condemned as the “rising trend” of internet-based broadcasting allegedly violating national regulations. The Statement also cited vague concerns over “unverified, harmful or offensive material”—terms so broad they could be used to target virtually any criticism of the government.
“These incidents represent a blatant disregard for the guidelines provided in the nation’s broadcasting laws,” the statement reads—though it notably fails to offer a single example of what constitutes such violations, raising suspicions about the real intent behind this sudden concern.
Instead of defending ethics or media integrity, BAZ’s message reads like a biased anti content creators guide clearly stating that it will continue to monitor both traditional and digital media and will not hesitate to “decisively enforce” existing laws. For many Zimbabweans, this rings alarm bells—it’s a familiar tactic in a country where freedom of speech has long been under siege.
With traditional media continuing to suffer from censorship and political interference, digital platforms like YouTube, Facebook, and X (formerly Twitter) have become lifelines for alternative voices. Zimbabwe’s growing discomfort with these platforms signals a fear of losing control over the national narrative.
The Statement from BAZ’s heavy-handed letter seems less about upholding standards and more about intimidating those who dare to speak truth to power. It’s a classic case of using vague legislation and broad interpretation to justify censorship.
Comments