The claim from the office of First Vice-President Jane Ansah is as simple as it is troubling: Malawi’s State broadcaster no longer appears interested in covering her activities.
According to her communications director, Richard Mveriwa, events involving the country’s First Vice-President are being ignored by the Malawi Broadcasting Corporation (MBC) on both radio and television. “Maybe, yes, they are giving us a blackout,” he said.
Whether that allegation is entirely fair is almost beside the point. What matters is that MBC, a public broadcaster funded by taxpayers, has offered no meaningful explanation. In declining to comment, it has merely deepened speculation about the motives behind its editorial choices.
The complaint comes against the backdrop of a deteriorating relationship between Ansah and the heart of government.
In recent months, she has publicly expressed frustration at being marginalised from official duties, alleging that she has been excluded from Cabinet meetings and denied advance government papers by Chief Secretary Justin Saidi.
Neither Saidi nor President Peter Mutharika has publicly addressed those accusations.
Ansah has insisted that her relationship with the President remains cordial. Yet if the State broadcaster has indeed stopped covering the sitting Vice-President, it would be difficult to dismiss the development as routine editorial judgement.
The issue strikes at the heart of what MBC is supposed to be.
Section 87 of the Communications Act requires the broadcaster to operate independently and without political bias.
Those principles have long been easier to proclaim than to uphold. Successive administrations have faced criticism that MBC functions less as a public service broadcaster than as a platform for the government of the day.
Ironically, President Peter Mutharika himself once complained about the corporation’s election coverage, particularly its focus on his age during the campaign.
Yet critics argue that little has changed under his watch. Concerns have persisted, not least after Information and Communications Technology Minister Shadric Namalomba suggested that employees unwilling to embrace the government’s vision for MBC could face dismissal.
Felix Washon, chairperson of Misa Malawi, argues that both the law and public expectation require MBC to serve as an impartial platform.
Human rights activist Michael Kaiyatsa draws an important distinction. No public official is automatically entitled to airtime. But if coverage is determined by political favour rather than public interest, a public broadcaster has failed in its duty.
That concern extends beyond the fortunes of any individual politician.
Kaiyatsa notes that access to State media has often appeared to fluctuate according to a senior figure’s standing with the President.
Ansah’s office has pointedly compared her treatment with that of Second Vice-President Enock Chihana, whose official engagements have reportedly received significantly greater attention from MBC.
Such comparisons inevitably fuel perceptions of institutional bias.
The official response has done little to allay those concerns. Namalomba has deferred questions to MBC. The broadcaster, in turn, has simply refused to comment.
For a publicly funded institution, silence is rarely a convincing defence.
Ultimately, this is not a story about Jane Ansah alone. It is about whether Malawi’s national broadcaster serves the public interest or the interests of those who hold power.
That question will not be settled by legal provisions, political assurances or carefully worded statements. It will be answered by what viewers and listeners see on their screens and hear on their radios.
If a serving Vice-President can effectively disappear from the State broadcaster’s coverage, MBC has some explaining to do.
Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :