This research is premised on the understanding that media texts are discourses and that all discourses are functional, that is, they refer to things, issues and events, in meaningful and goal oriented ways. Nine articles are analysed to explicate the sorts of discourses that were promoted by The Chronicle during the Gukurahundi conflict in Zimbabwe between 1982 and 1986. It is argued that discourses in the news media are shaped by the role(s), the type(s) of journalism assumed by such media, and by the political environment in which the news media operate. The interplay between the roles, types of journalism practised, and the effect the political environment has on news discourses is assessed within the context of conflictual situations. This is done using insights from the theoretical position of peace journalism and its critique of professional or mainstream journalism as promoting war/violence journalism. Using the case of The Chronicle's reportage of the Gukurahundi conflict in Zimbabwe, it is concluded that, in performing the collaborative role, state owned/controlled media assume characteristics of war/violence journalism. On the other hand, it is concluded that The Chronicle developed practices consistent with peace journalism when it both espoused the facilitative role and journalistic objectivity. These findings undermine the conventional view among proponents of peace journalism that in times of conflict, the news media should be interventionist in favour of peace and that they should abandon the journalistic norm of objectivity which they argue, promotes war/violence journalism.

This study critically interrogates representations of the San and Tonga in the Chronicle and the NewsDay Southern Edition/Southern Eye newspapers in 2013. It makes sense of how these representations and the journalistic practices that underwrite them position the ethnic groups as ‘minorities’ - in relation to other ethnic groups - within the discourses of Zimbabwean nationalism. Underpinned by a constructionist approach (Hall, 1997), the study makes sense of the San and Tonga identities otherwise silenced by the “bi-modal” (Ndlovu- Gatsheni, 2012: 536; Masunungure, 2006) Shona/Ndebele approach to Zimbabwean nationalism. In socio-historic terms, the study is located within the re-emergence of ‘ethnicity’ to contest Zimbabwean nationalism(s) during debates for the New Constitution leading to a Referendum in March 2013. The thesis draws on social theories that offer explanatory power in studying media representations, which include postcolonial (Bhabha, 1990, 1994; Spivak, 1995), hegemony (Gramsci, 1971), and discourse (Foucault, 1970, 1972; Laclau and Mouffe, 1985) theories. These theories speak to the ways in which discourses about identity, belonging, citizenship and democracy are constructed in situations in which unequal social power is contested. The thesis links journalism practice with the politics of representation drawing on normative theories of journalism (Christians et al, 2009), the professional ideology of journalism (Tuchman, 1972; Golding and Elliot, 1996; Hall et al., 1996), and the concept of journalists as an ‘interpretive community’ (Zelizer, 1993). These theories allow us to unmask the role of journalism’s social power in representation, and map ways in which the agency of the journalists has to be considered in relation to the structural features of the media industry in particular, and society in general. The study is qualitative and proceeds by way of combining a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) (Fairclough, 1992; Richardson, 2007) and ideological analysis (Thompson, 1990) of eight news texts taken from the two newspapers and in-depth interviews with 13 journalists from the two newspapers. This way we account for the media representations journalists produced: sometimes reproducing stereotypes, at other times, resisting them. Journalists not only regard themselves as belonging to the dominant ethnic groups of Shona or Ndebele, but as part of the middle class; they take Zimbabwean nationalism for granted, reproducing it as common-sense through sourcing patterns dominated by elites. This silences the San and Tonga constructing them as a ‘minority’ through a double play of invisibility and hyper visibility, where they either don’t appear in the news texts or are overly stereotyped.