China’s Media Expansion in Zambia: Influence on Government, Commercial, Community, and Religious Media
Iginio Gagliardone
Zhang Yanqiu
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article offers an important empirical contribution to scholarship investigating the influence of China on African media. It is methodologically sound and clear in its main intents. However, there are areas that require attention, in order to present the results more clearly and ground the article's main arguments.
Presentation of findings
The article describes the methods employed quite clearly, but there are significant gaps. Apart from ZNBC, there is no mention of other media outlets included in the study. It is important to offer greater details on which media were categorised as commercial, community, and religious (this information will offer greater opportunities to other scholars of Zambian media to assess the validity of the claims). In addition, given the significant reliance on quantitative methods for data analysis, one would expect at least one summative table presenting the results for each category. Without it, the references in the text to different analyses performed remains relatively obscure and difficult to follow (the authors seem more concerned with demonstrating the reliability of the findings rather than offer opportunities to readers to access the findings). There are also some inconsistencies and/or sentences that need attention. For example "The 9-year database, on 246 which I base my analysis indicate changes from negative to positive reporting of China 247 even in community and religious media" (this sentence seems unclear and to be at odd with the 2-constructed-weeks design illustrated earlier). On page 6 the authors use the word "caused" in inverted commas (p.6). Causation is either proved or cannot be just watered down by using an expedient like this. This also has relevance for the following sentences.
Greater clarity in presenting main arguments
Reflecting on the findings, the authors also use phrasing that is unclear or does not seem to solidly build on them. For example, on p. 7, "First, that the media categories in Zambia have equal influence, which is theoretically good." What does this mean? What should be theoretically good? This seems more a value judgement. Similarly "For example, having state-owned and commercial 310 media influence community and religious media might not be the best thing". What is "the best thing". In relation to what. Clearer explanations must be provided.
Smaller issues
The article should be substantially proofread. For example, on p. 1, "(b) how is it spread" ?? Some authors are cited but do not appear in the bibliography (Wigston (2001). On page 4, "137 from community media, and 72 articles 197 from Community media (p.4)". These are just examples, but cases like these occur throughout the manuscript.
Literature review
Some of the recent literature cited is indeed relevant, but there has been quite a lot of production in this area in the past few years. See for example Wekesa, Marsh, Wassermann, and others.
Author Response
Dear Reviewers,
Thank you very much for clearly spending considerable time to help this paper improve. I have highlighted substantial changes to the manuscript itself and made a comment-by-comment response to all your concerns. I have left your comments in bold, and my responses in italics.
Once again, I appreciate everything and believe you’ve made this manuscript significantly better. But I also believe that this part of the process of publication can go either way.
Open Review
( ) I would not like to sign my review report
(x) I would like to sign my review report
English language and style
(x) Extensive editing of English language and style required
( ) Moderate English changes required
( ) English language and style are fine/minor spell check required
( ) I don't feel qualified to judge about the English language and style
|
Yes |
Can be improved |
Must be improved |
Not applicable |
|
|
Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic? |
( ) |
(x) |
( ) |
( ) |
|
Are all the cited references relevant to the research? |
(x) |
( ) |
( ) |
( ) |
|
Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated? |
(x) |
( ) |
( ) |
( ) |
|
Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling? |
( ) |
( ) |
(x) |
( ) |
|
For empirical research, are the results clearly presented? |
( ) |
( ) |
(x) |
( ) |
|
Is the article adequately referenced? |
( ) |
(x) |
( ) |
( ) |
|
Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature? |
( ) |
(x) |
( ) |
( ) |
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The article offers an important empirical contribution to scholarship investigating the influence of China on African media. It is methodologically sound and clear in its main intents. However, there are areas that require attention, in order to present the results more clearly and ground the article's main arguments.
Presentation of findings
The article describes the methods employed quite clearly, but there are significant gaps. Apart from ZNBC, there is no mention of other media outlets included in the study. It is important to offer greater details on which media were categorized as commercial, community, and religious (this information will offer greater opportunities to other scholars of Zambian media to assess the validity of the claims).
- Thank you for pointing out that discrepancy. I have clarified the query in the paper. Essentially, I have indicated that we categorized our media into four. While ZNBC is a broadcast media, it also hosts other media outlets that symbolize the state-owned media. Therefore, ZNBC in this sense represents state-owned media as a category to match with commercial, community, and religious media. This has also been clarified in the introduction section, page 2, line 58 as follows (ZNBC in this paper, thought referring to broadcast media, is used synonymously with all state-owned media, including newspapers, magazines, and internet-based websites (Ndawana, Knowles, & Vaughan, 2021).)
In addition, given the significant reliance on quantitative methods for data analysis, one would expect at least one summative table presenting the results for each category. Without it, the references in the text to different analyses performed remains relatively obscure and difficult to follow (the authors seem more concerned with demonstrating the reliability of the findings rather than offer opportunities to readers to access the findings).
- Initially, I had avoided tables with the hope that I would describe the findings more easily than with the tables. I also avoided complex statistical language to focus on basic findings. But with the recommendation of the reviewer, I have added a table to describe the overall data
There are also some inconsistencies and/or sentences that need attention. For example "The 9-year database, on 246 which I base my analysis indicate changes from negative to positive reporting of China 247 even in community and religious media" (this sentence seems unclear and to be at odd with the 2-constructed-weeks design illustrated earlier).
- I have rephrased the sentence for clarity sake and have connected it to the table provided
On page 6 the authors use the word "caused" in inverted commas (p.6). Causation is either proved or cannot be just watered down by using an expedient like this. This also has relevance for the following sentences.
- In have expanded the sentence for clarity’s sake and indicated that thus follows from the Rozelle-Campbell Baseline model of causality. In this sense, Causality is used both sparing, but also referring to a particular causal model reflected in the results
Greater clarity in presenting main arguments
Reflecting on the findings, the authors also use phrasing that is unclear or does not seem to solidly build on them. For example, on p. 7, "First, that the media categories in Zambia have equal influence, which is theoretically good." What does this mean? What should be theoretically good? This seems more a value judgement. Similarly "For example, having state-owned and commercial 310 media influence community and religious media might not be the best thing". What is "the best thing". In relation to what. Clearer explanations must be provided.
- Thank you for pointing this out. The reviewer is right. In response we have made it clear to explain that the influence and theory talked about in this sense is within a broader understanding of “agenda-setting”, a theory that describes influence. Therefore, I have tried to tie back my arguments to the theoretical framework presented earlier.
Smaller issues
The article should be substantially proofread. For example, on p. 1, "(b) how is it spread" ?? Some authors are cited but do not appear in the bibliography (Wigston (2001). On page 4, "137 from community media, and 72 articles 197 from Community media (p.4)". These are just examples, but cases like these occur throughout the manuscript.
- I have proofread the paper for inconsistencies and grammatical errors
Literature review
Some of the recent literature cited is indeed relevant, but there has been quite a lot of production in this area in the past few years. See for example Wekesa, Marsh, Wassermann, and others.
- I strongly agree with the reviewer although the updating of the literature might skew other things. Nonetheless, I have acknowledged the works of especially the three mentioned scholars.
Reviewer 2 Report
This study tried to examine how news about China is presented, spreads, and impacts the diversity of opinions in state-owned, commercial, community, and religious media outlets in Zambia. Drawing from the 2012-2021 data.
This research is important to the field as China-African relations are a vibrant, two-way dynamic in which both sides adjust to policy initiatives and popular perceptions stemming from the other. The research assessed Chinese and African goals, African perceptions on China, and China verse versa including this information.
It is an Interesting and relevant topic is discussed. The author’s intension for the study is clearly introduced.
However，there is weak understanding on how Chinese media works in Zambia. Start Time mentioned here is Chinese priviate media but not government-owned media. Other Chinese media are not discussed. The media background of Zambia in regards to China of the study isn't as clear. This thought direction should be discussed more thoroughly in the introduction and perhaps in the results section. Make sure to reference the information.
Actually, according to the findings, it is just a media representaion study on news content about China in Zambia, which could not lead to the discussion and conclusion that "China’s Media Expansion in Sub-Saharan Africa interms of Influence". The findings and research foucs could not support the title.
The paper is generally consistent with media practice in Zambia. The timeframe of study was characterised by political events- two elections; Presidential and General elections. Mainly state media editorial policy was influenced by the political agenda for the Goverment in power. Startimes funded digital migration of ZNBC and refurbished studios . However, the misinformation about the take over of ZNBC and ZESCO came from private owned media. Like the paper has pointed out -the elite fund the operation of the media and exert influence on content and programming. Religious media outlets, like the Chatholic are funded by the Vatican and operate to promote the interests of religious organisations. StarTimes funded the digital migration and exerted influence in news content at that time.
REVISIONS
The Literature review section could explain the agenda of Chinese media in Zambia, so as to tie up the results stated in the findings.
Regarding Zambia’s media landscape, more discussion can be made about how the establishment and current state of media relation between China and Zambia. Espcially examine why community and religious media cover China more negatively, such as the credibility of these media and pressure for market which might led these media to be more aggressive for attention?
China's role in Africa defies conventional stereotypes and relations. China is both a long-established diplomatic, trade and security, partnership with Africa. China has sought a more constructive role as contributor to Africa’s economic interests, but this has often been criticized and China seen as an using an exploitative or neo-colonial approach. The paper has well eluded on this thought, however from your findings; (from the paragraph titled “Agenda setting and Information flow”)
(a) What can you explain is the agenda of Chinese media in Zambia? (Explanation and Need for Figures and Statistics)
(b) How has this relation come to “expand” over the years? (Explanation and Need for Figures and Statistics)
(c) What does the future look at like for Chinese media in Zambia?
It would also be good to mention and discuss other types of aftertreatment research such as from your findings, what has presented as trying to solve the problem or elucidate the benefits thereofe.
Under Measures; synchronized material should include more details for the experimental section.
The summary/conclusions section should include a short discussion that lays out the importance of these results and how each summary point ties together to show this importance.
Author Response
Dear Reviewers,
Thank you very much for clearly spending considerable time to help this paper improve. I have highlighted substantial changes to the manuscript itself and made a comment-by-comment response to all your concerns. I have left your comments in bold, and my responses in italics.
Once again, I appreciate everything and believe you’ve made this manuscript significantly better. But I also believe that this part of the process of publication can go either way.
REVIEWER 2
Open Review
(x) I would not like to sign my review report
( ) I would like to sign my review report
English language and style
( ) Extensive editing of English language and style required
( ) Moderate English changes required
(x) English language and style are fine/minor spell check required
( ) I don't feel qualified to judge about the English language and style
|
Yes |
Can be improved |
Must be improved |
Not applicable |
|
|
Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic? |
( ) |
(x) |
( ) |
( ) |
|
Are all the cited references relevant to the research? |
(x) |
( ) |
( ) |
( ) |
|
Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated? |
( ) |
(x) |
( ) |
( ) |
|
Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling? |
( ) |
( ) |
( ) |
(x) |
|
For empirical research, are the results clearly presented? |
( ) |
( ) |
( ) |
(x) |
|
Is the article adequately referenced? |
( ) |
( ) |
(x) |
( ) |
|
Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature? |
( ) |
( ) |
( ) |
(x) |
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
This study tried to examine how news about China is presented, spreads, and impacts the diversity of opinions in state-owned, commercial, community, and religious media outlets in Zambia. Drawing from the 2012-2021 data.
This research is important to the field as China-African relations are a vibrant, two-way dynamic in which both sides adjust to policy initiatives and popular perceptions stemming from the other. The research assessed Chinese and African goals, African perceptions on China, and China verse versa including this information.
It is an Interesting and relevant topic is discussed. The author’s intension for the study is clearly introduced.
However，there is weak understanding on how Chinese media works in Zambia. Start Time mentioned here is Chinese priviate media but not government-owned media. Other Chinese media are not discussed. The media background of Zambia in regards to China of the study isn't as clear. This thought direction should be discussed more thoroughly in the introduction and perhaps in the results section. Make sure to reference the information.
- Thank you for the insights. In response, I have added some background materials to the history of Chinese media in Zambia. Regarding Chinese media, I intentionally approached it as a whole given the lack of literature. That is why the unit of analysis is simply China. In the introduction section, I have indicated how the approach is more about how China is presented in the media as opposed to measuring Chinese news agenda in a traditional sense. If that were to happen, we would be comparing Chinese news agenda from Chinese news media, which is not a case for this study. The reality is that measuring agenda setting in its traditional sense is complex in Africa
Actually, according to the findings, it is just a media representaion study on news content about China in Zambia, which could not lead to the discussion and conclusion that "China’s Media Expansion in Sub-Saharan Africa interms of Influence". The findings and research foucs could not support the title.
- The reviewers are accurate in pointing to this. The headline might be misleading, but purposefully, given the measures taken in showing how the media in Zambia presents China.
The paper is generally consistent with media practice in Zambia. The timeframe of study was characterised by political events- two elections; Presidential and General elections. Mainly state media editorial policy was influenced by the political agenda for the Goverment in power. Startimes funded digital migration of ZNBC and refurbished studios . However, the misinformation about the take over of ZNBC and ZESCO came from private owned media. Like the paper has pointed out -the elite fund the operation of the media and exert influence on content and programming. Religious media outlets, like the Chatholic are funded by the Vatican and operate to promote the interests of religious organisations. StarTimes funded the digital migration and exerted influence in news content at that time.
- The reviewers are actually correct and note an important point. In our research, we practically reached out to the government regarding the allegations, and we were warned not to pursue the topic. Ideally, there should have been a retraction or some public information describing the relationship. That information has not been available for access.
REVISIONS
The Literature review section could explain the agenda of Chinese media in Zambia, so as to tie up the results stated in the findings.
- This is important and I totally agree with the reviewer. The challenge is that there is barely any research that has been done on agenda-setting in Zambia. Our literature review relied on data from West Africa.
Regarding Zambia’s media landscape, more discussion can be made about how the establishment and current state of media relation between China and Zambia. Espcially examine why community and religious media cover China more negatively, such as the credibility of these media and pressure for market which might led these media to be more aggressive for attention?
- That is very true. Except for space reasons, I have attempted to address those in the discussion section.
China's role in Africa defies conventional stereotypes and relations. China is both a long-established diplomatic, trade and security, partnership with Africa. China has sought a more constructive role as contributor to Africa’s economic interests, but this has often been criticized and China seen as an using an exploitative or neo-colonial approach. The paper has well eluded on this thought, however from your findings; (from the paragraph titled “Agenda setting and Information flow”) It would also be good to mention and discuss other types of aftertreatment research such as from your findings, what has presented as trying to solve the problem or elucidate the benefits thereofe.
Under Measures; synchronized material should include more details for the experimental section.
The summary/conclusions section should include a short discussion that lays out the importance of these results and how each summary point ties together to show this importance.
(a) What can you explain is the agenda of Chinese media in Zambia? (Explanation and Need for Figures and Statistics)
-(b) How has this relation come to “expand” over the years? (Explanation and Need for Figures and Statistics)
(c) What does the future look at like for Chinese media in Zambia?
- The reviewer point to very interesting questions that I would probably leave for future or extended studies. In our data collection process, we found little or no substantial documentation other than information from private and the seemingly non-legitimate social media. We tried to reach out to the officials, but were advised to stop the search for that information. Essentially, the Zambian government has been very discreet of their dealings with China, especially as it relates to the media that is why it is challenging to respond to the questions with confidence. Most of our data relied on what most people would consider as unreliable claims. However, such claims are popular and evidenced. If the government wanted to clear their names, it would help for them to write a statement that counteracts the claims. Therefore, this paper simply presents the findings so that the reader can make their conclusion
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I have reviewed the authors' response and the article and I am happy to approve the new manuscript for publication. The addition of the tables and figures offers much needed clarity for the reader and ability to examine the findings in greater detail.
Also the corrections in the conclusions help clarifying the key contribution of the article.
Author Response
The reviewer is satisfied with my earlier responses and I appreciate that.
Reviewer 2 Report
1) So far, the title still sounds misleading, overly broad, and does not mention Zambia as a case study.
2) No conclusions are drawn at the end or in the abstract, just discussion, which still sounds inadequate to support the title.
3) No Zambian media environment is provided. Such as how Top Star or other Chinese media infiltrated Zambia in the field of news production.
4) The current research is still a study on media content presentation, rather than a study on the media effect of the influence of Chinese media in Zambia.
5) The survey results do not support the title in a logical way.
Author Response
Thank's once again for reviewing my paper for the second time. Below is how I addressed each of the queries:
1.) So far, the title still sounds misleading, overly broad, and does not mention Zambia as a case study.
- I have changed the topic to specifically point to Zambia as opposed to sub-Saharan Africa.
2) No conclusions are drawn at the end or in the abstract, just discussion, which still sounds inadequate to support the title. - I have added a sentence to the abstract that accounts for the conclusion. I also argue that the last two sentences, though not mentioning conclusions, were designed to stand as conclusions
3) No Zambian media environment is provided. Such as how Top Star or other Chinese media infiltrated Zambia in the field of news production. - essentially, there is no data on that. Therefore this study attempts to do that. Although not explicit, the finding suggests so, even when it is not directly referring to media effects as we know them. In the title, I use the word influence to suggest so, and I have been using the word media effects sparingly
4) The current research is still a study on media content presentation, rather than a study on the media effect of the influence of Chinese media in Zambia. - Very true - I agree with the reviewer and I have outlined statements throughout the paper to suggest so.
5) The survey results do not support the title in a logical way. - I changed the title to suggest so.
