The Herald
By Knowledge Mushohwe
26 June 2013
A FEW years ago, the only way a politician could interact directly with potential voters during an election campaign was through mass gatherings.
Rallies are probably the single biggest instrument for political information dissemination.
The principal purpose of a rally is to gather as many people as possible to show support and solidarity for an issue, individual or cause.
Such a gathering may have an extended objective.
A large turnout may generate publicity through the mass media and the key ideas may filter through to a wider audience.
Rallies also educate both the electorate and the prospective leaders as well as stimulate further action.
They may raise money, energise and inspire both leaders and supporters, serve notice on the opposition, and help build alliances.
Compared to other forms of campaigning and with the exception of mass violence, rallies involve very little risk, they have high visibility, and are often punctuated with fun, including singing, eating drama, poetry and mock demonstrations. There are however, several challenges associated with holding of political rallies.
They are extremely weather sensitive.
Bad weather, such as windy conditions, heavy rains or very low temperatures can significantly lower the overall turnout. Because numbers in campaigning are everything, a poor turnout can be disastrous politically.
Low turnout may be seen as lack of general support and this may encourage opponents.
Crucially, rallies are usually long, especially when the star speaker thinks he/she is entitled to arrive late.
When rallies have too many speakers and not enough music, the speakers frequently say nothing new or interesting, and the whole event may be largely passive and may evoke to neutrals a party-image atmosphere that is difficult to enthuse them.
One type of rally that is cost effective and appears to be gaining popularity is mass communication through digital means.
Social networking forums such as Facebook, Blogging and Twitter are bringing politicians closer to the public. Because the public is always online looking for information relevant to their social and political life facets, politicians need little marketing to connect to the right crowd.
Minister of Tourism and Hospitality Industry Walter Mzembi for example has almost 5 000 Facebook followers while Information Technology minister Nelson Chamisa has over 3 000 friends.
According to media personnel that constant communicate with politicians in one way or the other, leaders making use of social networking forums are not many.
MDC-T’s Douglas Mwonzora, Theresa Makone, Thokozani Khupe, Chamisa, Jessie Majome and MDC’s David Coltart are frequent users of either Facebook, Twitter or both. In the other MDC formation, the feuding leaders, Arthur Mutambara and Welshman Ncube are familiar names on Facebook.
For Zanu-PF only MP Anastansia Ndlovu and ministers Mzembi and Saviour Kasukuwere appear very keen to communicate with the general public through social networking.
It is rather unfortunate that very few political leaders recognise the value of the internet in information dissemination. The majority of information non political leaders available on the internet is secondary data sourced by a third party and repackaged for the general public’s consumption.
Primary data, raw and unedited from the leaders themselves would prove invaluable in the relationship between them and the electorate.
There is no chance of misquotation by middlemen, and with no editing the information would be as direct and as accurate as possible.
Zanu-PF may complain through the media about sanctions but it would have been more effective if the leaders set up their own social networking accounts to explain, in their own words, point by point, the negative effects of these illegal measures on the general public.
The popularity of a pseudonym Facebook account called “Baba Jukwa†with 183 000 likes, shows the political data vacuum that exists is only being partially filled by a few individuals.
The online consumers are obviously there and waiting and with file sharing and mass communication between ‘friends’ a routine for most, advertising a new source of information is not the most difficult task.
A politician with several thousand followers can instigate an “online rally†by providing direct information to his/her followers.
Online rallies have a big advantage over the conventional rallies in that both the public and the leaders as individuals have a better way of asking questions, giving answers and view what others have to say about relevant information. Conventional forms of rallies require a lot of work for them to succeed.
Initial meetings, involving many people, have to develop a structure for overall co-ordination, and accessibility and availability of the venue are primary concerns at the start. The timetable, printing of rally accessories, advertising, endorsements, transport logistics, fund-raising and co-operation with the media are rally-related issues that require brainstorming and proper planning. But online rallies require very little.
Social networking provides a cost-effective political dialogue involving up to several thousand people.
Unlike the conventional means, online political rallies form a complex communication model where information flows both ways between politicians and the general public, between one member of the public and another, and this may bring in more and more participants linked to the initial communicators.