津巴布韦部分私人媒体对土地和所有权的报道

Washington Mushore
{"title":"津巴布韦部分私人媒体对土地和所有权的报道","authors":"Washington Mushore","doi":"10.25159/0256-6060/1238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to scrutinise how the concepts of land and land ownership were discussed in the private media in Zimbabwe during the Zimbabwe land reform exercise – dubbed ‘the third Chimurenga’ that took place in the period 2000–2008. Using textual analysis, the articles argues that ownership of land, according to the so called ‘private or independent’ newspapers in Zimbabwe was supposed to be accorded to the farmer or person, regardless of the racial bias, who was more productive on the land and who was contributing more to the economic well-being of the nation (Zimbabwe). Accordingly, the private newspapers in Zimbabwe regarded land as belonging to, or as the rightful property of the white commercial farmers/settlers because they perceived them to be more productive on the land than the native people of Zimbabwe who were ultimately seen and labelled as invaders on the so-called white commercial farms. In order to substantiate the above claims and arguments, a number of The Daily News stories of the period were purposively sampled and are used as examples.","PeriodicalId":442570,"journal":{"name":"Latin American Report","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"THE REPORTAGE OF LAND AND OWNERSHIP IN SELECTED PRIVATE MEDIA IN ZIMBABWE\",\"authors\":\"Washington Mushore\",\"doi\":\"10.25159/0256-6060/1238\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this article is to scrutinise how the concepts of land and land ownership were discussed in the private media in Zimbabwe during the Zimbabwe land reform exercise – dubbed ‘the third Chimurenga’ that took place in the period 2000–2008. Using textual analysis, the articles argues that ownership of land, according to the so called ‘private or independent’ newspapers in Zimbabwe was supposed to be accorded to the farmer or person, regardless of the racial bias, who was more productive on the land and who was contributing more to the economic well-being of the nation (Zimbabwe). Accordingly, the private newspapers in Zimbabwe regarded land as belonging to, or as the rightful property of the white commercial farmers/settlers because they perceived them to be more productive on the land than the native people of Zimbabwe who were ultimately seen and labelled as invaders on the so-called white commercial farms. In order to substantiate the above claims and arguments, a number of The Daily News stories of the period were purposively sampled and are used as examples.\",\"PeriodicalId\":442570,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Latin American Report\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-07-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Latin American Report\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25159/0256-6060/1238\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Latin American Report","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25159/0256-6060/1238","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章的目的是审视在津巴布韦土地改革期间,土地和土地所有权的概念是如何在津巴布韦的私人媒体中被讨论的。津巴布韦的土地改革被称为2000-2008年期间的“第三次奇穆伦加”。通过文本分析,文章认为,根据津巴布韦所谓的“私人或独立”报纸,土地所有权应该属于农民或个人,无论种族偏见如何,谁在土地上更有生产力,谁对国家的经济福祉贡献更大(津巴布韦)。因此,津巴布韦的私人报纸认为土地属于白人商业农民/定居者,或认为这是他们的合法财产,因为他们认为他们在土地上比津巴布韦土著人民更有生产力,而后者最终被视为所谓白人商业农场的入侵者。为了证实上述主张和论点,有目的地选取了《每日新闻》这一时期的一些故事作为例子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
THE REPORTAGE OF LAND AND OWNERSHIP IN SELECTED PRIVATE MEDIA IN ZIMBABWE
The aim of this article is to scrutinise how the concepts of land and land ownership were discussed in the private media in Zimbabwe during the Zimbabwe land reform exercise – dubbed ‘the third Chimurenga’ that took place in the period 2000–2008. Using textual analysis, the articles argues that ownership of land, according to the so called ‘private or independent’ newspapers in Zimbabwe was supposed to be accorded to the farmer or person, regardless of the racial bias, who was more productive on the land and who was contributing more to the economic well-being of the nation (Zimbabwe). Accordingly, the private newspapers in Zimbabwe regarded land as belonging to, or as the rightful property of the white commercial farmers/settlers because they perceived them to be more productive on the land than the native people of Zimbabwe who were ultimately seen and labelled as invaders on the so-called white commercial farms. In order to substantiate the above claims and arguments, a number of The Daily News stories of the period were purposively sampled and are used as examples.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信