No specific name.

Malawi, various locations.

Actions started in 2011 and are still mostly ongoing.

Unlike other gen z actions, Malawi gen z actions are less to do with protests but rather take on a different style. Whilst Gen Z in Malawi have been involved in protests, especially against the hardships faced in the country economically, socially and politically, they are barely the ones leading the protests. Instead, initiatives led by Gen Z in Malawi take the form of marches and digital campaigns such as the anti-corruption digital activism and climate justice march. For this project, the focus will be on the digital campaigns led by Gen Z. The actions intend to increase awareness whilst simultaneously urging the youths to be active and participate in the politics thus shifting the power dynamics and creating a culture of accountability.

The digital anti-corruption campaign in Malawi operates through a hybrid model combining formal reporting platforms with grassroots social media activism. Complementing these are social media campaigns where activists and figures like musician Fredokiss use platforms such as Facebook and  tik tok  to mobilize youth, expose alleged corruption, and demand accountability under the slogan “Your Phone Is Your Weapon.” This has urged many other gen Z to speak on pressing political matters. However, this modality faces criticism that online accusations sometimes lack verifiable evidence, risking the credibility of anti-corruption efforts. The ecosystem is further strengthened by institutional programs, including youth capacity-building workshops and public awareness initiatives by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, ensuring digital tools are backed by education and formal follow-up mechanisms.

Supporters embrace the campaign enthusiastically, viewing mobile phones as legitimate “weapons” for accountability.  Though the campaign/action is criticised, for many young Malawians who feel excluded from formal political processes, this campaign offers an accessible, immediate means of participation . They see documenting and exposing malpractice on social media as exercising “citizen power” against entrenched systems.

The key message in the campaign is that it is important for the youth to have their voices heard and hold the government accountable even if it means taking it to social media masses.

The intended audience is mainly the youth but also the entire population as they need to participate as well as stay aware. This is also intended for the government to hold officials accountable.

Influential writer Onjezani Kenani has publicly endorsed the movement, lending intellectual credibility to the idea that digital platforms are crucial arenas for civic engagement.

Official channels include the ACB Connect mobile app, launched with UNDP support for anonymous reporting, and the government’s toll-free short code 332, which allows citizens to report misconduct confidentially.  Complementing these are social media campaigns where activists and figures use platforms such as facebook, tik tok, twitter  and WhatsApp to raise different political issues.

Critics argue that this approach risks undermining serious anti-corruption work. Activist Bon Kalindo and others have condemned what they describe as “reckless” social media accusations, insisting that evidence belongs with formal institutions like the Anti-Corruption Bureau, not on Facebook . An opinion piece sharply criticises activist Alex Kamangila’s methods as “social media performance” rather than genuine activism, arguing that real corruption cases are won in courtrooms-not comment sections. Critics warn that online accusations without verifiable evidence can damage reputations, fuel hostility, and ultimately weaken institutional accountability rather than strengthen it. Nonetheless, the campaign has raised critical issues in the political space as more youth demand accountability.

The counter-narratives challenging digital activism in Malawi have achieved mixed effectiveness, exposing deep public divisions while struggling to derail the broader movement. Government-aligned counter-narratives face effectiveness challenges. Revelations that State House allegedly paid “digital defenders” millions of kwachas to counter online criticism backfired, sparking public outrage over using scarce resources for propaganda while hospitals lack drugs . Similarly, attempts to discredit critics like Onjezani Kenani as deliberate misinformers  have not halted his influence as  Kenani continues lending intellectual weight to digital activism .

The most significant limitation remains the digital divide itself, with less than 14% internet penetration and high data costs , counter-narratives primarily reach elite urban audiences, limiting their national impact. Ultimately, while counter-narratives have sharpened debates about methodology and due process, they have failed to suppress the underlying citizen demand for accountability that fuels the movement.