A photo showing President Peter Mutharika alongside Zimbabwean businessman Sir Wicknell Chivayo and First Lady Gertrude Mutharika has stirred a storm of reactions on social media after commentator Onjezani Kenani questioned how the photograph found its way into the public domain.

The source of discord

Kenani raised concerns about the handling of presidential images, warning that those around the President need to be careful about such photo opportunities.

“Who released this photo to the public? I think those around the President need to be careful about these photo-ops. Some photos have the potential of damaging the otherwise good image of the President. The reactions are hilarious. Wait till South Africans see this, they will roast us,” he wrote.

His remarks quickly triggered a lively debate on Facebook, with users offering different explanations about how the image surfaced online and what it means for the presidency.

Who likely released the photo

Several commenters pointed to a common explanation: that the photograph was posted by Chivayo himself on his own social media platforms.

Joseph Chisamba wrote:

“That Zimbabwean guy is the one who post on his page.”

Another user, Fiskani Chisi, echoed the same claim:

“It’s the guy from Zimbabwe… check on his Instagram.”

Sam Dalitso also suggested the visitor may have shared the image himself, while stressing the need for tighter communications control.

“But then, it was Wicknell himself who posted on his page. Still, the PR apparatus must be gatekeepers of all image assets before they go public.”

If the image was indeed released by the guest, analysts say State House may not necessarily have had control over its publication unless prior agreements were made regarding photography and social media sharing.

Why the photo triggered controversy

Even if the meeting itself was routine, observers say the optics of such images can easily generate controversy.

Some social media users argued that when a visitor releases a photograph with a sitting president before official channels do, it can appear as though the visitor is using the presidency to elevate their own status.

Others questioned the way the photograph was framed.

One commenter, Ephraim Nyondo, noted:

“Komanso the guy positions the camera in a way that makes him look as if he more prominent than our good leader. Not good one, this.”

In political communication, even small details such as camera angles and positioning can influence how the public interprets an image.

The background reputation of individuals appearing with national leaders can also shape public reaction.

Hadji Mkolola wrote:

“That Wicknell guy has a stinky history of corruption, shouldn’t be anywhere near the president.”

Perception versus reality

Communication experts say the episode reflects a broader challenge in modern politics: perception often becomes the story.

Images of leaders in informal settings with wealthy businessmen can quickly trigger speculation online about influence, business deals or political patronage—even when no such arrangements exist.

This is why presidential meetings are typically documented by official State House photographers and images are released through formal channels first, helping shape the narrative before unofficial versions circulate online.

The social media dilemma

The debate also highlights a growing reality for governments around the world: controlling images in the era of smartphones and social media has become increasingly difficult.

Once a visitor has access to a phone and platforms like Facebook or Instagram, they can instantly publish photos taken during private meetings.

Even global leaders such as Donald Trump faced similar situations when visitors shared images from behind-the-scenes encounters before official media teams could release their own photographs.

A lesson for presidential communications

For many observers, the controversy points to a practical lesson for presidential media teams.

Protocols often require that official photographers capture and release approved images quickly, ensuring that the first pictures reaching the public are carefully framed to reflect the dignity of the office.

Some administrations also introduce media guidelines for visitors, including restrictions on posting photographs taken inside sensitive areas.

Supporters of the President, however, dismissed the controversy as unnecessary.

Comfort Kibombwe Kondowe wrote:

“I don’t see any problem.”

Another user, Eddie Edson Banda, argued that critics were simply overreacting.

“Palibe vuto, mukufuna nthawi zonse azikhala mu suit? Good picture.”

Despite the differing opinions, the discussion demonstrates how a single photograph involving a national leader can ignite intense scrutiny and debate in the fast-moving world of social media.

Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :