via Diminishing Returns of Negative Campaigning in the Succession Race | newzimbabweconstitution 27 October 2014
Negative campaigning is familiar technique in political contests. Campaigners focus on the personal traits and the policy negatives of the rival with the object of demonising them so that by the time the race begins in earnest, they will be politically wounded. Kusvibisa, as it is known in Zimbabwean political circles, the aim is to soil the reputation of the rival with as much dirt as can be gathered.
It can work effectively, especially when aided by control of propaganda machinery. It creates negatives or amplifies the negatives of the rival. It is a technique that the anti-Mujuru faction has deployed relentlessly in recent months, as the race for succession gathers serious momentum.
It began with Chris Mutsvangwa questioning and discrediting Joice Mujuru’s liberation war record, suggesting that it was a myth that needed to be debunked. Then Grace Mugabe took it to another level, labelling Mujuru as corrupt, lazy, dull, incompetent and devious. She took it to a personal level – severely attacking and humiliating the Vice President, to the extent of publicly refusing to accept her offer of a handshake at the airport.
As we have already observed, this negative approach was designed with the aim of provoking Mujuru into making an ill-judged and reckless response that would put her in a tight spot. They wished for her to commit political suicide by responding without care, as so often happens when one has lost control of their emotions. They would have been severely disappointed by her refusal to capitulate and take the bait.
But useful as it might be, negative campaigning can become a serious liability. A barrage of attacks might work for a time but eventually, the returns begin to diminish, especially if it is not producing the intended effect. Far from doing political injury to Mujuru, the negative campaign, spearheaded by The Herald and the Sunday Mail – with The Chronicle and The Sunday News playing the role of hand-maidens – appears to have generated more political capital for Mujuru. Grace Mugabe has appeared in the public eye as a petty, disrespectful, undignified and vindictive individual compared to Mujuru’s calm and dignified demeanour. Rather than damage Mujuru, the negative campaign has done serious harm to whatever reputation Grace Mugabe had at the beginning.
It has also exposed those behind her – since most people do not believe Grace Mugabe is an autonomous political actor but that she is no more than a puppet of the political masters whose ambitions dwarf her own but have until now remained in the background. Those behind her were exposed when she implored people to respect Mnangagwa, clearly her preference, who is Mujuru’s major rival in the succession race. Mngagwa himself has acknowledged her endorsement, chanting the “Pamberi neOrange Crush” slogan that is symbolic of Grace Mugabe’s political trajectory.
What we begin to see now in the state media is an attempt at building up a positive campaign for Mnangwagwa, seeing, no doubt, that continued focus on Grace Mugabe and the exclusively negative campaign against Mujuru has become a liability. Of course, the negative campaign will not end. It will still be there – because it helps to remind and cement in the minds of the public how “bad” and “unworthy” Mujuru is, but we will now begin to see more and more positive coverage of Mnangagwa – as a suitable and credible leader.
It is this change in approach that explains why The Herald today, for the first time in weeks, carries less vitriolic headlines against Mujuru and instead, highlights Mnangagwa as calling for peace and unity. It is plain that the positive headlines and coverage is designed to build the image of their preferred candidate in the succession race.
This is where Grace Mugabe, if she were clever enough to see, would notice the manner in which she is being employed as the broom to do the dirty work. While upon reading the story, it is clear that Mnangagwa is also attacking Mujuru and her faction, The Herald does not prioritise that negativity in its headline. Instead, it presents him positively as a unifier. This is in stark contrast to the manner in which the same paper has cast Grace Mugabe – as a raging beast, attacking everyone in sight, with reckless abandon. It is easy to see who is cast as a hero and who is the villain.
And of course, The Herald deliberately ignores the Mujuru’s call for unity and peace which she made in her dignified speech at Dotito on Saturday. They will say The Sunday Mail had already covered it before but then a quick look at that paper’s headlines demonstrates that it framed her speech as “Mujuru Hits Back at First Lady” – a desperate effort to cast Mujuru as spoiling for a fight with her tormentor. The fact that her response was actually mature and dignified, focusing as it did on unity, peace and humility was deliberately ignored – because of course, that would be too positive.
All this is, of course, hardly surprising. We have already observed that the state media has taken a decidedly anti-Mujuru approach in the succession race. While it has hesitated, with the focus mainly on the dirty job that Grace Mugabe was deployed to do, today’s headline and story shows more clearly that it is pro-Mnangagwa. We also observe that the negative campaign is beginning to get tired and is producing negative effects, hence the apparent change, which more focus on the positive aspects of their preferred candidate. We suspect we will be seeing more of this as the weeks progress, especially as campaigning for the Vice Presidency and therefore, a vantage slot in the succession race, intensifies.
COMMENTS