Uncategorized
The Government of Zimbabwe’s decision to set aside US$10 million to support content creators marks a significant policy moment for the country’s digital economy. Announced at separate events by the Ministers responsible for Media and Broadcasting Services and ICT, the initiative responds to a long-standing reality: most social media platforms do not allow direct monetisation of accounts based in Zimbabwe, limiting income opportunities for local creators despite their growing audiences and influence.
At its best, a Content Creators Support Fund can become a catalyst for innovation, youth employment, cultural export, and digital skills development. At its worst, if poorly designed, it risks becoming another well-intentioned but ineffective public fund. Its success will therefore depend on how opportunities are harnessed and challenges managed.
The fund can be an opportunity unlock economic value from creativity that is currently informal and under-rewarded. Zimbabwe has a vibrant ecosystem of comedians, educators, musicians, journalists, podcasters, digital artists, and influencers producing content for platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, and TikTok. While many of these creators have significant followings, their revenue streams are often limited to ad-hoc brand deals, donations, or personal savings. A well-structured fund could provide grants, seed capital, or production support, allowing creators to improve quality, consistency, and reach—turning passion projects into sustainable enterprises.
The fund also presents an opportunity to promote national culture and soft power. Zimbabwean stories, languages, music, humour, and social commentary are already being consumed across Africa and the diaspora with minimal benefits to the artists.
Supporting local content creation can strengthen cultural identity, counter misinformation, and project Zimbabwe’s narrative globally. Educational and developmental content—covering agriculture, health, civic education, and entrepreneurship—could also complement government communication goals while remaining creator-driven.
Another key opportunity lies in skills development and formalisation of the digital economy. Beyond direct financial support, the fund can be used to provide training in digital storytelling, copyright management, platform analytics, cyber security, and business management.
This would help creators transition from informal hustling to compliant, tax-paying digital enterprises, contributing to broader economic growth.
However, these opportunities are matched by serious challenges. The most immediate is governance and transparency. Public funds in Zimbabwe operate under a cloud of very limited trust, and without clear criteria, independent oversight, and public reporting, the fund risks accusations of favoritism, political patronage, or elite capture.
In the era of “party affiliates”, accusations of less gifted but politically aligned content creators getting support ahead of their gifted but non aligned compatriots are very predictable and likely. Content creators are diverse, decentralised, and often critical voices; if funding is perceived to reward loyalty rather than creativity and impact, the initiative could quickly lose legitimacy.
A second challenge is defining who qualifies as a content creator. The digital space includes journalists, activists, comedians, influencers, musicians, designers, and even meme pages. Without a clear, inclusive definition, the fund could exclude emerging creators in favour of already-visible personalities, reinforcing inequality rather than widening opportunity. Closely related is the risk of urban bias, where creators outside Harare and Bulawayo metros struggle to access information, application platforms, or decision-makers.
At worst, the fund could actually benefit people who are not even involved in content creation if not structured and managed properly. Accusations of Youth Funds benefiting geriatrics and able bodied people claiming as much as 80% Disability from the War Victims Compensation Fund are part of Zimbabwe’s history and a remodelled repeat remains possible.
The fund must also contend with the structural problem of platform monetisation restrictions. While US$10 million can provide temporary relief, it does not resolve the underlying issue that Zimbabwean accounts cannot easily earn from global platforms due to payment systems, debt and sanctions-related risk perceptions, or platform policies. Thus, the success of content creators in Zimbabwe must also become an agenda of our diplomatic and international debt management strategy. If the fund becomes a substitute for genuine engagement with platforms and payment providers, it may create dependency on government rather than sustainability.
There is also a tension between creative freedom and state involvement. Content creation thrives on authenticity, critique, satire, and sometimes dissent. If funding comes with explicit or implicit expectations of “positive” coverage or avoidance of sensitive topics, creators may self-censor, undermining both artistic integrity and public trust. This would weaken the very ecosystem the fund seeks to support. The central theme in propaganda strategies is to create and support many messengers for one message. Thus if the fund will only be available for like minded content, its focus will be propaganda rather than creativity.
Finally, sustainability remains a concern. A once-off or short-term injection of funds, without a long-term strategy, risks producing short-lived projects that collapse when support ends. The challenge is to ensure that funding leads to durable income models, audience growth, and skills transfer rather than temporary consumption.
Thus, the Content Creators Support Fund announced by the Government of Zimbabwe has the potential to be transformative. It can empower young people, formalise the digital creative sector, and amplify Zimbabwean voices at home and abroad. Yet this promise will only be realised if the fund is governed transparently, designed inclusively, insulated from political interference, and aligned with a broader strategy to address monetisation barriers. If handled carefully, the initiative could mark Zimbabwe’s serious entry into the global creator economy; if mishandled, it risks becoming another missed opportunity in a rapidly evolving digital world.
