Digital Freedom or Digital Anarchy? Why Zambia Needs to Clean Up Social Media
Once upon a time, misinformation in Zambia moved slowly – passed between curious marketeers, office chatter, and neighbourhood gossip. Today, a single misleading Facebook post or a half-baked WhatsApp voice note can spark national outrage within minutes. We now live in a time where truth is often the casualty of viral excitement, and social media – for all its blessings – is becoming both a mirror and a magnifier of our deepest societal flaws.
Take the recent incident involving former Defence Minister Geoffrey Bwalya Mwamba (GBM). In an astonishing showcase of digital recklessness, online users circulated false news of his death. Not only was this disrespectful to the family and friends, but it also exposed how social media platforms can be hijacked to play god with people’s lives.
But this is not a standalone case. We’ve seen social media used to spread tribal slurs, manufacture lies about politicians, destroy marriages with leaked private content, and even scam the most vulnerable out of their hard-earned savings. Some platforms have become breeding grounds for vulgarity and sexualised content, where young users are exposed to indecent material without filters. Meanwhile, self-proclaimed social commentators freely dish out insults, attack others’ dignity, and create fake “breaking news” for attention.
Let me be clear: social media is not the problem. In fact, it’s one of the greatest tools of our time. It has empowered citizens to hold power to account. It has given young Zambians a platform to promote businesses, tell their stories, expose corruption, and even educate others through skits and commentary. During COVID-19, social media was a lifeline for accurate information and community mobilisation. Even now, cooperatives and small businesses are using Facebook to connect with markets that were previously unreachable.
The problem is the abuse – the unchecked anarchy disguised as “freedom of speech.”
This is where the Cyber Security and Cyber Crimes Act becomes critical. Yes, some fear that the law might be used to silence dissent or curtail civil liberties. That is a valid concern. But the law, if fairly and transparently enforced, is our best shot at cleaning up the digital mess before it rots the core of our national values.
Zambia cannot continue allowing social media to be a safe haven for scammers, fake prophets, digital nudists, and tribal warlords hiding behind anonymous profiles. The law provides tools to fight back against:
-
Cyberbullying and harassment (especially affecting women and public figures)
-
Scams involving fake investment schemes, crypto fraud, and online theft
-
Leaking of private photos or sex tapes – a trend that is destroying lives
-
Insults and demeaning language, now passed off as “content creation”
-
Tribal hate speech, which threatens national unity
-
Pornographic and indecent exposure, easily accessible by minors
But laws alone are not enough.
We need massive investment in digital literacy. From Grade 5 pupils to university students, from church groups to komboni residents everyone needs to understand how to verify news, report abuse, protect themselves from scams, and respect others online. Civil society, ZICTA, the Ministry of Information, and social media influencers must partner to lead this moral and technological revolution.
Only when we combine policy, education, and community responsibility can we restore sanity online. The digital space must evolve into a zone of innovation, truth, and unity—not a playground for hate, deception, and immorality.
Zambia deserves a digital culture that builds, not breaks. The future of our nation’s conversation online and offlinede pends on it.
-Douglas Leroy Namafente is a columnist, social analyst, and radio host. He writes on digital culture, governance, and political communication in Zambia-.
Who will regulate what is true and what is not without politics been perceived to have a hand in it?
That should not be the question right now. I think its refreshing and important that the points raised by the writer and the article is pertinent.
When we understand the problem and work to addressing recognising the importance of the issues, the how and where will be addressed.
We run to who will regulate and it because about personalities. Journalist and the field have no standards and every jim jack and jock pertends to be a journalist, spreading the very ills the writer speaks to.
I read the first three sentences and got bored.
“can spark national outrage within minutes” really? Since when did Zambia have national outrage from social media? The author is one among those promoting government authoritarianism from fear of the unknown.
Government then comes up with draconian anti freedom of speech laws. They forget that one day they won’t be in power and these same laws will be chasing them
It sad that you think that guardrails are “authoritarianism”
There is no Laissez-faire in the real world; is a type of economic system in which transactions between private groups of people are free from any form of economic interventionism.
Get real my friend this utopian notion that you think exists doesnt.
Guardrails exist to protect from abuse when thoughtfully done. Read the article again objectively without a biased mind. Is what the writer suggesting true? If so as a society; before we end up like Sudan. What can we do to protect, safeguard and disemminate facts balanced devoid prejudices and innuendo. Protect each other from the malice and damage that is caused by people without restraint and protect those who are still young from harm.
If we think in those lines, something good will come out the guardrails. A balance way to ensure that what is put out there is factual and safe. Look at the laws and efforts in law that exist in western countries to protect kids, to protect others. And am not talking about the efforts that the Trump Administration has thrown out window years work to create rule and policies put up in this regard; no. But look at what was done before. And understand that this was not attained over night, not is it perfect. But a quest to attain that objective balance.
The cure for misinformation is more freedom of speech – of course with filters to ensure age appropriateness especially as far as kids are concerned.
So what are the filters that we should put in place. And why? Once we start having a rational and logical discussion we start making progress.
Hence, I am against starting the discussion with who should regulate. As that isnt the core problem; what are the filters (as you point out) and why this filter and not that.
Thank you for bring out that. As the filter addresses the problem.
It depends on the sensitivity of the people in government. For example if I say Mr X has failed… our agents will be on me accusing me of planning***** the government. Just as the bloggers may abuse the media, also government is capable of abusing social media laws.
What makes people sensitive?
Jata Bulenge… because of insecurities, mistrust, selfishness and self-centered egos.