Zimbabwe has three Cellular network providers that provide service all over the country. Of these three Econet is the largest outstripping the other two in subscriber base and profits. At the end of the last financial year Econet Wireless Zimbabwe declared an income higher than the government.

There is no doubt that Econet is a prime example of what hard work, determination and a little faith are able to achieve. Considering the odds that were stacked against the company at its inception, Econet provides hope for all future Zimbabwean entrepreneurs with a big idea.

But Econet may also be used to illustrate the effect of big business on little people. As the market leader Econet sets the trend for the Cellular network provider services industry. The Econet brand has been positioned as one that stands for progressiveness, integrity and one that is oriented towards satisfying customer needs. Econet Wireless Zimbabwe fails to meet its own values.

It is difficult to see the integrity in a company that must be asked to revise its tariffs downward after charging much more than companies in the rest of the region. Service delivery has progressively deteriorated as more subscribers are added to Econet’s books. A few months ago, Econet placed full-page ads in the national newspapers, thanking customers for making them number one in terms of subscriber base. This gratitude did not translate to any tangible value for customers. Neither was there an explanation for such bad service delivery.

Most recently, the company has rolled out a plan to increase coverage with its much-touted ’90 base stations in 90 days’ campaign. Yet the more pressing issue of network expansion is glibly dismissed as being in Econet’s ‘future plans’. This may be Africa, but we are not stupid.

Econet’s major competitors would be wise to take advantage of, and not make the same mistakes. Even the most faithful brand loyalist will migrate to a company that delivers the service that is promised.

Scanning The Herald newspaper today, I noticed how women hardly feature and when they do, they’re generally criticised. We live in a such a man’s world. A world where the emphasis is all on men. Women are still treated as inferior beings whether it be in the classroom, office, or on the sports field. In society women are often treated as if they are a piece of meat. A lot of women are harassed and treated disrespectfully by men. They are whistled at and flirted with constantly.

This disrespectful treatment is extremely evident in the case of sport and particularly in the case of sports magazines that feature half naked women in bikinis. Women let themselves down by allowing themselves to be exploited for a male dominated market where sex sells. Let’s see some actual sports women on the cover of Sports Illustrated, instead of wafer thin super models with bleached blonde hair.

In October 2009 Sports Illustrated featured an article in which they suggested “Sports men who score the most  . . . talent for the game leads to spotlight of fame. Fame leads to money. And money leads to . . . honey” – sports stars get the hottest dates. Fact. Those who score on the field usually score off it too . . .who is complaining?”

I am.What message are they trying to put across? Women are simply regarded as an accessory. What is this saying to the youth of today? It portrays women purely as sex symbols and nothing more .

Then when Sports Illustrated finally features an article on an actual sports woman, its high jumper Blanka Vlasic winner of the gold medal at the world championships in Berlin and she is given absolutely no recognition for her true talent and ability but rather credited as “hottie of the year”.

I find this completely demeaning.

From www.ifex.org

The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has been poised for months to award a life sciences prize named after and funded by President Teodoro Obiang, the abusive ruler of Equatorial Guinea. On 15 June, UNESCO delayed awarding the controversial prize, but rights groups such as Human Rights Watch say that’s not enough. Meanwhile, opposition to the prize has grown more vociferous – including statements from journalists worldwide who have been repressed by their own governments.

About 270 organisations all over the globe have campaigned against the UNESCO-Obiang Nguema Mbasogo International Prize for Research in the Life Sciences – a $3 million grant provided by Obiang – calling for the award to be cancelled completely. The next meeting of the governing board is scheduled for October. The funds behind the prize should be used to promote basic education and other needs for Equatorial Guinea’s people, say rights groups.

The prize was created in 2008 to recognise “scientific achievements that improve the quality of human life.” But 75 percent of Equatoguineans live in abysmal poverty in sub-Saharan Africa’s fourth largest oil producer. The government is known for its use of unfair trials, arbitrary arrests, incommunicado detentions and systematic torture – as well as vast official corruption that squanders funds. Rights groups are outraged that UNESCO would accept money from this source, says Human Rights Watch.

Seven recipients of UNESCO’s most prestigious award, the UNESCO/Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom prize given to courageous journalists, sent a letter to the organisation’s director-general expressing opposition to the prize. The Cano laureates cited in particular “the severe repression in Equatorial Guinea” and that Obiang “oppresses the media.”

Under Obiang’s iron grip, the press is almost totally controlled by the state, say 30 IFEX members in a letter sent in May to UNESCO. Local journalists working for international media outlets have been targeted with detention or imprisonment. State journalists who express “even a modicum of objectivity” have been dismissed from their jobs.

The 2010 soccer World Cup is finally underway, and we see the whole of South Africa as well as the rest of the world united in “World cup fever”.

Prior to the World Cup, South Africa was in chaos, with the murder of Eugene Terreblanche  leader of the AWB, following some controversial “hate speech by Julius Malema: “shoot the boer”.  I believe that the 2010 soccer world cup has helped South Africans to overcome their differences and embrace and share this amazing event together. Many South Africans have put their differences aside and united in support of their nation. The 2010 soccer world cup illustrates how powerful sport can be in terms of uniting people, we have seen this in the past with the 1999 rugby world cup, where Nelson Mandela sported Francois Pienaar’s number six rugby jersey. This event was crucial in transforming South Africa from a divided nation to a unified one.

First they prayed and now they’re in mourning. Bafana Bafana . . . will they still get through?