×

Warning

JUser: :_load: Unable to load user with ID: 755

JUser: :_load: Unable to load user with ID: 754

National governments remain the single largest source of revenue for news organisations in Africa. In Rwanda, for example, a staggering 85-90% of advertising revenue comes from the public sector.

In Kenya, it’s estimated that 30% of newspaper revenue comes from government advertising. In 2013, the government spent Ksh40 million in two weeks just to publish congratulatory messages for the new President Uhuru Kenyatta.

But with a general election coming up this year in August, the Kenyan government has decided to stop advertising in local commercial media. In a memo, reportedly sent to all government accounting officers, the directive was given that state departments and agencies would only advertise in My.Gov - a government newspaper and online portal.

Electronic advertising would only be aired on the state broadcaster – the Kenya Broadcasting Corporation. It’s difficult not to characterise the withdrawal of state advertising from commercial media as punitive. Without this revenue stream newspapers are likely to fold.

Worse still, efforts to withdraw government advertising from commercial media can be interpreted as a worrying way to undermine the freedom of expression. Starving news media of revenue is a means of indirect state control. This has been the case in countries such as Serbia, Hungary, Namibia, Lesotho and Swaziland. But to fully understand the link between government spend on advertising and media freedom it’s important to take a historical perspective.

How did we get here?

The 1990s saw the adoption of multi-party politics in many African countries. This led to relatively liberal constitutions in South Africa, Kenya, Nigeria and Ghana among others.

Since then, most African governments have grown anxious about their inability to control the local news agenda, much less articulate government policy. For governments in countries such as Ethiopia, Uganda, Zimbabwe and more recently Tanzania, controlling the news agenda is seen as a means to stay in power. Views that compete with the state position are often cast as legitimising the opposition agenda.

This is part of a much broader strategy for political control which Africanist historians and political scientists have called the “ideology of order”. This is based on the premise that dissent is a threat to nationbuilding and must therefore be diminished.

The narrative was popularised by most post-independence African governments and emphasized through incessant calls for what they liked to call “unity”.

In Kenya, former president Daniel Moi even coined his own political philosophy of “peace, love and unity”. Citizens were expected to accept this narrative unequivocally. Dissenting views were undermined through state-controlled media such as Kenya Broadcasting Corporation and newspapers such as the Kenya Times.

From the 1960s - 1980s, African governments conveniently used the nation-building argument to suppress legitimate dissent. Opposition was punished by imprisonment, forced exile and even death. This was common practice in Kenya, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Uganda, and in West Africa more generally. The current political climate on the continent is premised on constitutional safeguards including the protection of free speech which make these kinds of punishments unlikely in the present day.

Many countries now have institutional safeguards including fairly robust judicial systems capable of withstanding the tyranny of naked state repression. As a result, the media is controlled in subtler ways and its violence is softer. It’s against this background that I interpret the withdrawal of government adverts from the commercial media in Kenya.

Controlling media budgets

In Kenya, the decision followed a special cabinet meeting which agreed that a new newspaper would be launched to articulate the government agenda more accurately. The government also argued that the move was part of an initiative to curb runaway spending by lowering advert spend in Kenya’s mainstream media and directing all the money to the new title.

A similar move was made in South Africa last year when the government’s communications arm announced that it would scale down government advertising in local commercial media. Instead, advertisements would be carried in the government newspaper Vuk’uzenzele. The decision withdrew an estimated $30 million from the country’s commercial newspaper industry.

The South African government also claimed that the move was made to reduce government spending. But critics have argued that the decision was made to punish a media outlet that’s been particularly critical of President Jacob Zuma’s presidency.

In both countries the decisions have hit at a particularly hard time for the media industry, providing governments with the perfect tool with which to control the press.

Will a free press survive

Commercial news media is going through a period of unprecedented crisis. The old business models are unable to sustain media operations as audiences adopt new ways of consuming news. More than that, mass audiences are growing ever smaller. Newspapers particularly haven’t been able to adapt to the changing profile of the old versus the new newspaper reader.

The effect has been that newspapers are no longer as attractive to advertisers. As such, they have to rely a lot more on state money and patronage for survival. To sidestep state control commercial media in Africa must rethink their business models and diversify their revenue streams.

It won’t be an easy road but non-state media must also work hard to disrupt this re-emerging narrative of “order”. Nation states cannot revert to the dark days when government policy was singular and alternative viewpoints were silenced or delegitimised.

George Ogola, Senior Lecturer in Journalism, University of Central Lancashire

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

When G20 leaders meet later this year in Hamburg, investment in Africa’s future will be high on their agenda. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has already committed to using her presidency of the forum to promote “sustainable growth and jobs” on the continent, with a focus on “investments in infrastructure and renewable energies.”

Energy is not a new need for many Africans. While parts of Africa are energy-rich, supply remains frustratingly poor for most of the continent. Indeed, the African Development Bank calculates that some 620 million Africans live without access to reliable electricity.

But with advanced economies now expressing support for efforts to broaden the availability of this basic human need, perhaps the time has come to flip the switch on one of Africa’s biggest developmental – and societal – challenges.

According to the International Energy Agency, Africa accounts for 13% of the world’s population but only 4% of its energy demand. While residents of London or New York might complain of slow broadband or shoddy mobile phone reception, many people in African cities, towns, and villages still struggle with access to basic electricity to light their homes and power their businesses. As I have noted elsewhere, in 36 African countries, just two in five people have electricity throughout the day. In some countries, fewer than one in ten do.

Given this, it is not surprising that so many of Africa’s young people believe their best hope lies in traveling to Europe and beyond. Reliable electricity is about more than powering schools, hospitals, and homes. A reliable supply of power can allow young people to develop skills, find employment, and start a business – and can enable existing businesses to compete on a level playing field in regional and international markets. Because electricity is fundamental for economic development, providing communities and businesses with access to reliable, clean, and affordable energy will be my top priority during my stewardship of the African Union.

As the G20’s Hamburg agenda suggests, African and Western countries now have a shared incentive to work together to solve Africa’s developmental shortcomings. Africa cannot afford to lose generations of its young talent to places like Germany, France, and Italy, and European countries cannot afford to continue struggling with an influx of migrants. Among the best ways to reverse these trends is cooperation between developing and developed economics – particularly in the energy sector.

Opportunities for partnership abound. According to a February 2015 report by McKinsey & Company, Africa has an extraordinary reserve of untapped energy potential, including an estimated 10 terawatts of potential solar energy, 350 gigawatts of hydroelectric power, 110 gigawatts of wind power, and an additional 15 gigawatts of geothermal energy. Whereas it was once too expensive to exploit Africa’s vast renewable assets, technology is providing solutions that promote new enterprises and new opportunities. With sufficient international investment, Africa will have a chance to harness and use these resources.

We have already seen the impact new sources of power can have on African cities. Two years ago, residents of Conakry, Guinea’s capital, could not light their homes for more than six hours a day, and businesses went without the power they needed to operate. Now, thanks to the construction of the Kaleta hydroelectric dam by the China International Water & Electric Corporation, businesses have reliable power for up to 24 hours a day.

And it’s not just Guinea. From the huge pan-African Lekela wind and solar projects, to wind farms in Kenya and solar projects in Rwanda and Tanzania, large and small African countries alike are harnessing their natural resources to create jobs and produce clean, affordable energy.

What’s even more exciting is that these projects are not happening in isolation. They are being planned alongside a wider push to create a network of industrial-scale generating capacity across the continent.

International collaboration and investment are essential to these efforts. Working with international partners in West Africa, a groundbreaking electricity interconnector will allow power exports from Côte d’Ivoire to Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea. And this will be the first of several new public-private initiatives aimed at transforming how African countries deliver power.

If we get this right, we will not only strengthen African economies’ capacity to provide jobs and a future for our young people. We will open up new trading opportunities for both Africa and the West.

Having spent the last year coordinating energy policy within the African Union, I have sensed a growing mood of impatience from Africa’s political leaders on the topic, a sentiment that is shared by many of our people. But African leaders are demonstrating a new determination to improve younger generations’ prospects, not least by electrifying our economies.

Never in my lifetime have I seen Africa’s political leaders so focused on overcoming some of the challenges that have held back our continent for so long. Working with international partners in the public and private sector, we can chart a new and prosperous path for Africa and a hopeful future for our youth. And if African leaders pair their determination with the G20’s pledge to invest in infrastructure partnerships, the future for Africa’s people will be bright in more ways than one.

 

- By Alpha Condé is President of Guinea and Chairperson of the African Union.

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2017.
www.project-syndicate.org

Former US president Barack Obama often reminded audiences that his presidency was made possible by the brave men, women, and children of the civil rights movement. They had bolstered America’s democracy through stubborn protest. He applauded mass action as essential to building democracy and ensuring its durability once established.

He did not limit his praise of protest to the American context. In an address in May 2011, he spoke with admiration of the brave protesters of the so-called Arab Spring in the Middle East and North Africa. In his estimation they were akin to America’s 19th-century abolitionists and mid-20th-century civic rights activists.

Obama called these protests powerful democratic expressions from everyday citizens:

There are times in the course of history when the actions of ordinary citizens spark movements for change because they speak to a longing for freedom that has been building up for years.
He spoke glowingly of Tunisian protesters who faced batons and bullets, yet
refused to go home – day after day, week after week – until a dictator of more than two decades finally left power.

Obama embraced protests as an advanced political tool of the marginalised. It is therefore ironic and unfortunate that during his eight years in office he chose not to direct similar praise toward pro-democracy demonstrations in countries south of the Maghreb.

There were many high notes from the Obama administration on African affairs. But his silence on pro-democracy protests in Africa was a missed opportunity to engage directly with mass citizen-led movements.

Protests transforming politics in Africa

During his two official visits to the continent, and when African heads of state visited the White House, Obama raised the issues of transparency and good governance. But he reserved his remarks almost entirely for heads of state. He foisted on them the onus for change.

This is an anaemic rendering of the forces behind good governance in Africa. It stands in marked contrast to the richer, more textured and substantive analyses he offered when it came to the world’s other regions. Africa has been fertile ground for good governance movements. Transformative activism is redefining political participation in a host of countries. The most notable cases include Zimbabwe, South Africa, Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

Protests in Burkina Faso in October 2014 had the greatest success among these disparate movements. They forced Blaise Compaoré to resign when he tried to change the constitution after 27 years in power.

Currently, the DRC is in the midst of a protest-driven political transformation. In Kinshasa, Goma, Lubumbashi and other Congolese cities, more than 170 people have died in more than a year of sporadic protests. Still, people continue to return to the streets. The breaking point was when President Joseph Kabila refused to step down at the end of his second term, as mandated by the constitution. Protesters have also called for an independent commission to investigate the police violence and killings that have characterised the state’s response to protesters.

Catholic Bishops intervened to mediate talks that included representatives from the government, the political opposition and civil society organisations. These negotiations produced a government commitment to hold elections before the end of 2017.

The agreement also states that Kabila – who has been in power since 2001 – will neither change the constitution nor seek a third term. The talks and subsequent agreement were a direct product of the mass demonstrations. Mass action is working in the DRC. It would gain strength with greater foreign attention and pressure.

Departing from a proud history of solidarity

Obama, America’s first African-American president, took an approach to Africa that stands in contrast to the 100-plus-year history of African-American political leaders supporting and demonstrating solidarity with good governance movements in Africa.

The most notable, documented and celebrated example was the broad support for the struggle against apartheid in South Africa during the 1970s and 1980s.

But there were other issues and events that inspired Africa- Americans to take action in solidarity with Africans. These included King Leopold of Belgian’s forced labour colony in the Congo, Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia in 1935, white-minority rule in Rhodesia, Portugal’s ongoing colonial occupation in Africa during the early 1970s, and Western complicity in the ousting and ultimate assassination of Congo’s first prime minister, Patrice Lumumba, in 1960.

African-American activists, joined later by lawmakers, remained at the forefront of progressive American support for protest and dissent in the name of democracy and good governance.

Missed opportunities and renewed urgency

No American president had greater goodwill from Africans than Obama. Yet he disappointed by avoiding African issues that the American press and political establishment might consider radical or controversial. To play it safe, Obama stuck to the banal talking points on African authoritarianism and economic liberalism.

Protesters in Africa will not have a better friend in Donald Trump. His presidency is likely to be a reprieve for African autocrats. Trump will be content to reduce US engagement with Africa to trade and anti-terrorism. He has indicated that humanitarian and development aid are in danger of suffering massive cuts under his administration.

In this nascent, post-Obama period, the ongoing protests in many African cities deserve the support of US lawmakers. Merely acknowledging the issues at the heart of their movements and struggles would legitimise and buoy their causes in the international community. It would also give them leverage in their engagements with their respective governments.

Africa’s pro-democracy movements will continue with or without formal recognition from Trump or members of the US Congress. Yet such recognition is critical to lending them international legitimacy, and would help place extra pressure on repressive regimes targeted by protests.

In the Trump era, civil and human rights organisations, student organisations, trade unions, and African-American and other concerned lawmakers have a particularly important role to play in African affairs.

Benjamin Talton, Associate Professor of African History, Temple University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Every four years the CIA’s National Intelligence Council (NIC) provides the incoming president and his administration with an assessment of the most powerful global forces likely to affect foreign and domestic affairs. Known as the CIA’s Global trends, the report is also available to the public and normally has a time horizon of five years and beyond.

Donald Trump would probably be prompted to dismiss the 235-page 2017 edition with a tweet after getting just half-way down the first summary page. The next five years, the report says, will

close an era of American dominance following the Cold War.

Trump would undoubtedly see this as a personal affront to his promise that he will “Make America Great Again”.

Ironically, Trump’s own behaviour during his presidential campaign and transition only lends credence to one of the report’s general forecasts that the next five years

will see rising tensions within and between countries.

So far Trump has stirred tensions with a range of countries. He has made controversial statements that have offended, among others, Europeans, Asians and, of course, Mexicans.

The report provides a useful starting point to reflect on what’s in store for Africa over the next five years. And how the continent should think about responding to challenges it identifies in the context of a Trump presidency.

A case in point are the report’s findings set against Trump’s stance on climate change. The Global Trends 2017 puts greater emphasis on the urgent need to mitigate and adapt to global warming and other man-induced climate change than earlier editions. But Trump’s climate denial rhetoric and the prominent deniers he is including in his cabinet, contradict all available evidence-based judgements.

This might suggest that the continent and Trump are on a collision course given that Africa will suffer more than most regions from the threat of climate change. This needn’t be the case. There are some low-cost ways African Union members, individually and together, could undertake to slow down, and even derail, Trump and his climate deniers. And shrewd diplomats would do well to use the report as a useful reference for prodding US negotiators. They might also use it for gauging levels of public and Congressional support for Trump’s controversial policies.

Clues to Trump’s views on Africa

There have been few indications of Trump’s interest in sub-Saharan Africa. But a few clues of how his administration views the continent have been reported by the New York Times.

The report was based on a leaked four-page list of questions about Africa his transition team sent to the State Department and Pentagon. The questions indicate a general scepticism about the value of foreign aid or even US security interests in sub-Saharan Africa, suggesting Africans have squandered American money and effort.

Questions included:

With so much corruption in Africa, how much of our funding is stolen?

and in relation to the African Growth and Opportunity Act

Why do we support that massive benefit to corrupt regimes?

and regarding US business interests

Are we losing out to the Chinese?

Based on these questions, it’s possible that Trump will opt for an American retreat from the bipartisan development, humanitarian, and security assistance goals of previous administrations. Even so, policies he pursues on global issues such as trade and climate change will have a dramatic impact on the continent.

Trends facing Africa

The Global Trends report conclusion is that prospects for progress on the continent clearly outweigh the dangers. It says that in the next five years African countries will focus on internal issues as they struggle to consolidate the gains of the past 15 years and try to resist the geopolitical and economic headwinds that threaten them.

It also identifies the key challenges, among them the familiar issues of rapid population growth and rural-urban migration, severe if uneven environmental and health risks, radicalisation, and failures of governing institutions.

The report’s emphasis on climate change is particularly telling. It cites credible scientific evidence of global warming and forecasts dire consequences for countries across the world, including in Africa.

An emaciated cow walks in Gelcha village, one of the drought stricken areas of in Ethiopia. Reuters/Tiksa Negeri.

The report endorses the findings and process approved by 194 countries participating in the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The Obama Administration was a global leader in the IPCC and agreements reached in Paris in 2015 on reducing greenhouse gases emissions in a voluntary process now endorsed by virtually all UN members.

Obama was also committed to a bilateral agreement with China, obligating the world’s two largest emitters to major reductions. And he made a pledge vital to Africa of US$3 bn toward an initial IPCC $10 billion fund to assist the most vulnerable and under-resourced countries adapt to global warming. This fund is scheduled to grow to $100 billion annually by 2020.

Trump, however, has repeatedly threatened to renege on all these US commitments once in office.

What Africa needs to do

Here are some low-cost ways African Union members, individually and together, could undertake to slow and even derail Trump and his climate deniers:

  • Seize every opportunity in bilateral talks and multilateral forums to reference the findings presented in Global Trends 2017. Although prepared during the Obama administration, it is the work of non-partisan civil servants.
  • Devise and implement public diplomacy campaigns in partnership with civil society groups, environmental activists, and the African Diaspora. Recalling lessons from the highly effective anti-apartheid movement of the 1970s and 1980s could be helpful.

  • Develop a better understanding of and links to America’s booming alternative energy sector. Costs of solar, wind, and other clean energy sources have fallen dramatically to the point that economics, rather than politics or ethics now drive most major reductions of America’s dangerous emissions. There may be positive business opportunities for African companies and countries to exploit for economic grow, development and dealing with the effects of global warming.
  • Actively support Americans (and anyone else) who support a carbon tax, with generous allowances for low polluting African countries swap credits with rich emitters, with cash generated assisting climate adaptation.

  • With Obama gone, China alone appears poised for global leadership on climate change. South Africa could help by using its membership in the BRICS and close ties to China and Brazil to press India, and especially Russia to meet their obligations. Perhaps it might even get the group to increase its contributions to the special fund for seriously affected African countries.
  • R

    eassure potential American donors and partners, including Trump and his allies, that funds allocated for helping Africans adjust to climate change will be accounted for through a voluntary transparent process of planning and reporting. Such accountability is a key vision of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development and its African Peer Review Mechanism, currently under renewal.

  • Finally: tap into African expertise. Arguments should make full use of the continent’s small but growing community of climate scientists and their many links to America’s scientific community and environmental activists. Holding Trump to facts, not opinion, has failed so far. But evidence suggests public sentiment and economic incentives increasingly favour better climate management.

Africa’s appeals to America for fairness can be as effective as they once were for freedom.

 

John J Stremlau, Visiting Professor of International Relations, University of the Witwatersrand
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article..

 


  1. Opinions and Analysis

Calender

« April 2017 »
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30