Quarterly Bulletin

COVERAGE OF AFRICA: WHO TELLS THE AFRICAN STORY?

This article sets to discuss the debate on reporting Africa.  It argues that a true story devoid of the patronizing and condescending undertones, a story that critically analyses issues and provides hope for Africa, can best be told by Africans themselves and those who have achieved an understanding of Africa.  The African story can best be told by the use of African voices and Africans taking a central stage in the construction of the story.  There is need for a “new journalism” that remains patriotic through its work, objectively reporting things as they are with a critical and analytical mind, and offers positive criticism when it is due.  This is a breed of both African journalists and international correspondents who envisage the prospects of Africa as positive and objectively communicate this hope.

NEGATIVE REPORTING OF AFRICA

Over the years, there has been a general outcry from different quarters of Africa that the international media has done great harm to Africa in its coverage by casting Africa in negative light.  African governments and scholars have viewed this kind of reportage as a deliberate project of alienating Africa, firstly by the developed world under-reporting Africa, and secondly by the framing of Africa as a hopeless continent.  Few, if not any, international correspondents are sent to cover Africa on a long term basis. 

Mostly, those who are sent to Africa are assigned only in moments and areas of crisis and for a short while doing what is known as “parachute journalism.”  International media has low budgets for Africa as it believes that no good news can come out of Africa.  It believes that all news from Africa is bad news; resonating with the old journalistic maxim “if it bleeds, it leads.”

For instance, “since the end of colonialism, Western correspondents have stood in front of emaciated Africans or piles of African bodies and used the language of the Old Testament to mediate the horrors to their audiences” (Fergal Keane, 2004).   It is argued that the harm done, by negative reportage has not only affected the image of Africa but imparted negatively on Africans.  It has made Africans pessimistic about themselves and the development of their continent (Keane, 2004).

GOOD REPORTING

The change in the coverage of Africa is not the complete replacement of the negative coverage with the positive coverage.  What is needed is a reportage that is objective, balanced and does not focus on wars and disasters.  It is no wonder Hunter-Gault; an African Correspondent for the CNN for many years, contests the assumption that foreign media can never be balanced.  She is of the conviction that “international journalists can play a constructive role on the African continent provided they ‘come in right’” (Hunter-Gault, 2006).

The foreign correspondents reporting on Africa are said to have an attitude of superiority which enables them to make unfounded judgments on Africa.  To report on Africa, the foreign correspondents need to have an informed understanding of Africa.  All things being equal, Africa should be reported in its own context and not in comparison with the West.  In the international media, Africa has always taken the periphery role and the West the central role.  The excuse to this kind of reporting is that the intended audience is Western.  Notably, foreign correspondents cover Africa in order to inform the West about Africa.

NEW PARADIGM

The Western media, in the recent past, has undergone a paradigm shift in the reportage of Africa from one that portrays Africa as hopeless to that which attempts to show that there were good things taking place in Africa.  This new paradigm has been championed by young Afro-American correspondents thought to be liberal minded.   Young reporters emerging out of America are seen as having progressive views about the Third World.  The choice of Afro-Americans is a deliberate move based on the assumption that they do share historical bonds with Africa. 

According to media scholars, this new initiative has also its negative implications on the power of the media in reinforcing change.  The argument is that Africa, the continent, is a collection of nations that are pretty much like elsewhere in the world, struggling with success. There should be no special type of journalism reserved for its coverage.  It is argued that, “if the Western reporting of Africa used to drip with comical and trading stereotype, the bulk of reporting today is condescending coverage that tends to treat the citizens of the continent as children who cannot take rebuke and need to be bribed with sweet words” (Onyango-Obbo).  

This type of reportage assigns blame for the problems of Africa on the West instead of African governments.  The prime logic of this genre was to change the negative reportage of Africa especially after many African states had moved from one-party system to multi-party system.  Since the multi-party system became synonymous with democracy, the international media attempted to communicate this new wind blowing across Africa. Though the intention of positive news out of Africa was justifiable, the method of overlooking salient issues betrayed   the whole project.  This is similar to the kind of reportage by the African governments’ owned media whose journalists fail to critically analyze issues and give balanced news.  Onyango-Obbo notes that, “the patronizing reporting one witness today is as bad as the condescending work of the past.  What the African continent needs is good journalism, one that tells the stories as they are observed.  What has happened to the coverage of Africa in the Western media today offers the latest proof that there is no alternative to this proven approach” (2004).

Among African journalists, issues of patriotism surface mostly when independently owned media criticize those in authority.  The argument is that African leaders, flattered by the new genre of reportage, descend on critical journalists by labelling them as unpatriotic citizens.  Though to some extent Africa seems to be taking the central stage, most of the positive coverage is done in relation to the Western funded projects, how governments were succeeding in carrying out these programs.  A good example is the coverage on debt relief and HIV and AIDS.

The negative genre of reporting Africa poses a challenge to the media for the paradigm shift.  The challenge carries much weight for the African media and African journalists to begin honing and telling the African story.  Unlike using Western humanitarian agencies in the narratives, the media should utilise African voices, especially the emerging civil society.  Any coverage about Africa, be it on disasters or government achievements, would fail to be balanced if it lacked the analytical and critical approach. 

The disasters reported about Africa in the international media are true. Yet the issue has always been with the tone and the exclusion of the positive news happening on the continent.  To propose the exclusion of bad news would at once be giving a wrong image of the situation on the continent.  Some might be skeptical about relying solely on African voices because most might report with a sense of patriotism that pushes dirt under the carpet.  However, using African stories sourced from divergent views would score a plus for the balanced and realistic reportage of the continent. 

African journalist must acknowledge that Africa has its own dark side and the world does not owe the continent a living.  This is in line with down playing the situation on the ground for the sake of generating positive news about Africa.   African journalists should report the truth and not hide the evils around the quest for having positive news.  Positive news needs to create hope even amidst disaster; all it takes is a critical and analytical perspective. What is noticed in the debate about reporting Africa is that there is first the outcry for misrepresenting the continent, then there is the complaint that the West under-reports Africa through limited resources in foreign bureau.   What can be deduced from these arguments is that the international media has still a great role to play in reporting Africa and these concerns calls for the change in covering Africa.  It is from these complaints that again the issue of using African voices arise. 

NEW REPORTING

Nowadays, international media has started using Africans, natives of the areas reported on, as African correspondents.  In times of disasters African aid workers are used in the construction of the African story.  The new approach to reporting Africa takes account that there is not only a single African story to be told but there are many African stories to be told.

It is possible for African journalists and foreign correspondents to report on Africa provided that they use African voices.  Africa is not devoid of experts on many issues reported on Africa by international media.  The story of Africa is not only of disaster, disease, death or corruption but there is even more good news coming out of Africa.

Francis Chisembe Chishala, S.J.
Luwisha House