Chamisa’s HardTalk interview divides opinion

Chamisa’s HardTalk interview divides opinion
May 14 12:35 2018

MDC President, Nelson Chamisa’s interview on HardTalk was the major talking point on social media this week. Whilst Chamisa’s supporters say the MDC Alliance presidential candidate fared well and exhibited his leadership skills on the program, his critics say the program greatly exposed him as not yet ripe for the throne. Diplomat Magazine publishes some of the comments on the social media.


Save Mawarire

Nelson Chamisa’s interview today reminds me of the clips i always refer on Rhodesian history. They are from the BBC African Panorama programme and the anchor was a guy by the name Jeremy Paxman. The guy was very biased whenever he was interviewing Zanu/Zapu Nationalists. He was doing so on behalf of his kith and kin fronted by a racist Ian Douglas Smith.

The same was happening today as Stephen Suckur was interviewing Nelson Chamisa. He was biased in order to protect British minority interests because the whites feel now that Robert Mugabe is gone, they will have it all easy on the back of assurances from the New Desperation. Unashamedly Mr Sucker declared to Nelson Chamisa that ” Emmerson Mnangagwa is surely going to win come the elections”.

People of Zimbabwe are alone in this fight and the Diplomatic space is captured. We have to up our game, register to vote and Vote enmass to free ourselves.

 Tinayo Muchinguri

True to the spirit of TRUTH! I may be a Chamisa supporter but that Hard Talk interview exposed some flaws in his armor. He has tendencies to be over zealous especially with some reckless statements, which at this level of politics are not acceptable. Mr Chamisa should publicly apologise for all of the misleading statements that he has made and fall forward from this interview. Other than the white lies he was exposed for on Hard Talk, Chamisa handled himself well, not many can leave Hard Talk without taking a beating. ED definitely wouldn’t. He still has Gukurahundi and 37 years of being Robert’s henchman to explain away. When all is said and done, my vote still belongs to the MDC Alliance.

Maggie Mzumara

I don’t think the interview was badly done. Actually I think Advocate Chamisa held his own. Quite well.

Composed till the end, and he stayed on message (what folks are calling repeating himself, it’s called ‘staying on message’.) He demonstrated great interviewee etiquette, didn’t flinch, not once. Didn’t speak over or above the interviewer; wasn’t argumentative; did not betray any emotion. Did not insult;

Did not retaliate or give back the aggression he was getting from an aggressive interviewer. If he took offence he didn’t show it or let that take him over.

Scored key points of his own, some even good enough to make soundbites of note. What’s more -The queen’s language did not desert him in his hour of need in that hot seat.

HardTalk is exactly that – hard talk – and it can unnerve even the best of us. And he, MDC Alliance President, survived it without any visible sweat or stammering.

Of course, the “lies” – the “LIES” – are regrettable and they are always going to come back to haunt him. Those Trump, US$15 billion promises, whatnot… very regrettable.

The “lies” and half-truths and less-than-truths and misrepresentations of facts he said before, during or after the interview – are always going to dog him. Very regrettable.

Beyond giving himself a pat on the back for an interview, otherwise well handled (technique wise) there are some take-homes here.

Before I get to those it is would be helpful to point out that in an interview as in any communication transaction there is the content dimension and technique/process dimension. On technique the Advocate did well, it’s on content that he may need further work. To ensure he eliminates “lies”, half-truths and misrepresentations of the facts in his deliveries.

The take-home here includes, but it not limited to this: that the Advocate would do well to know and remember always that when you speak at the level he is speaking – at rallies whatnot – you do not speak into a vacuum. You speak to real people, most of them adults who hear you and have the mental capacity and presence of mind to analyse and evaluate the content of what you say. These people hear, they remember and they can critique and question you long after your-heat-of-the-moment political whims and banter.

So best think twice before speaking. You cannot afford to be taken over by/at the spur of the moment. It can come back to haunt you. The Miranda Rights apply here: Whatever you say can and shall be used against you.

If you have nothing truthful to say about certain aspects/issues, be silent on those. You do have a right to remain silent on what you are not sure of, what you do not have an answer or strategy for yet. Speak only on that which is truthful, factual, which you know is practical and practicable, keep away from the Wonderland, you are not Alice and this is not a fairy tale, it’s the real world.

After all is said and done though, beyond interview deliveries and whatnot, Advocate Chamisa and his team need to have some real answers to the people’s challenges beyond the rhetoric. Craft some serious strategies and have policy positions. Takazoti ideology yavo chii as MDC or as MDC Alliance? That needs to come out strong. And of course messaging – the broader messaging – needs to improve. It should.(Disclaimer: Am not a member of the MDC, neither do I belong to Zanu-PF or any other party. I write as a journalist, a blogger and a political commentator & analyst. Simply stating it as I see it, regardless of who subject is.) Am also an active and discerning citizen who is also a registered voter still deciding where to put my X.

view more articles

About Article Author

Diplomat Magazine
Diplomat Magazine

View More Articles