 make this your homepage |
 = denotes premium content | sign in |
|
|
|
| Thursday, June 03, 2004, 12:16 | Africa's first online newspaper est. 1994 |
QUICK LINKS - Today's weather - Games - Notes & Queries SERVICES - Subscribe to M&G; - News & Lotto SMS alerts - Subscription queries - Free news for your site - Book accommodation - Find old friends - Find a job - Find a date - Send flowers - Place an advert |
 |
This became clear last week at a gathering of leading African journalists in Cape Town, convened by the Sol Plaatje Institute of Media Leadership at Rhodes University and sponsored by the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. Participants at the meeting knew, of course, that Zimbabweans have been robbed of their biggest newspaper, The Daily News. And that its staff have been charged for unlicensed journalism, while the other remaining independent papers appear to be next in line. Now, while the African journalists talked in Cape Town, news came through that the police, not content with having prevented The Daily News from publishing, raided the company offices to confiscate equipment -- including even the laptop of editor-in-chief, Francis Mdlongwa. The Cape Town gathering also learnt of other troubles in the region. Again, in the midst of the discussions, news was received that Malawi’s independent weekly, the Chronicle, was having its assets attached by that country’s sheriff. The company lost its computers and a vehicle. The reason? To pay a government minister who had won a defamation case. In Nigeria, the Cape Town meeting was told, there are also problems. This Day newspaper, despite launching a South African edition this week, is still recovering from major stress back home. The problems date from a single opinion-piece in the paper which provided the required provocation for religious extremists to run amok. This Day’s offices in the north were burnt down, and the regional editor narrowly escaped beheading by a mob. Staff in Lagos had to seek military protection, and quickly stripped their cars of stickers carrying the paper’s name. The catalyst for the attacks was an article proposing that the Prophet Mohammed may have appreciated the Miss World contest. The writer had to flee the country to escape a fatwa, and the paper found itself publishing continuous apologies in the aftermath. Despite all this intolerance, little help was forthcoming from the Nigerian authorities. This Day staff believe that the state was not unhappy about the attacks because the paper is a fierce critic of government. They point to the government's own intolerance, which recently led to a radio station being temporarily shut down. Its crime was to play martial music, interpreted by jittery authorities as implying that there had been a coup in the country. The Cape Town meeting heard about a heavy-handed clampdown in Uganda on the independent daily, the Monitor. Soldiers took it over for three days last year on instruction from an overly-sensitive and overly-powerful government. The newspaper has bounced back with a tough stand, but the government has now shut shop on a radio station which recently broadcast coverage of refugees fleeing military conflict. Closer to home, Angola has seen strong government pressure on Radio Ecclesia, one of the country's more independently-minded broadcasters. Meanwhile, the Cape Town gathering was also told, Luanda's state-controlled media has ignored the intriguing story of why Angola has just given citizenship to a French arms-dealer wanted in Europe on corruption charges. All these problems call out for a concerted response by Africa’s media and by the public who treasure free speech. As it happens, a prime opportunity presents itself, thanks to the agenda put into play by the New Partnership for African Development (Nepad) which in turn is now an official policy framework of the African Union. The recent naming of a team to head up Nepad’s African Peer Review Mechanism is a related opportunity. In terms of Nepad’s founding documents, African governments are supposed to practice good governance. In turn, this is supposed to include respect for free speech, albeit qualified as “responsible freedom of expression”. The peer review team is required to consult with media, amongst others, when assessing a given country’s performance. Many people reckon the good governance initiative is rendered hollow by both its internal qualifications and the repression of Robert Mugabe and like-minded rulers. The counter argument is that even if this is all just a game, it remains an important one that no one can afford to boycott. If you take this second position, the challenge then becomes one of trying --in the public glare -- to hold the Nepad players to their stated commitments. A corresponding strategy for African media is to conduct their own independent review of good governance on the continent. It could be akin to the Mail & Guardian’s annual “Scorecard” of SA government ministers’ performance. It would be a fine initiative for African editors to co-ordinate such a review on a continent-wide scale, and to publicise the results on a common day. Given the self-interests of journalists, at the top of the list would be each government’s performance on media freedom. From a perspective wider than the media itself, there’s good general reason for being media-centric in such a review. This is because if governments don’t respect free expression, how can anyone -- Nepad included -- trust what they are told about any other aspect of good governance? Free speech is fundamental. Further, if the peer review team does indeed consult with the media, what stronger information could be mobilised than the scores on a checklist which has been agreed upon and publicised across the continent? One grouping that could run with the African media score-card idea is the African Editors Forum, to be launched in the Democratic Republic of Congo in April next year. This body was set up under the inspiration of the SA National Editors Forum (Sanef) in June, and its interim leadership is headed by veteran media freedom activist, Mathatha Tsedu, who is also editor of the Sunday Times. If this continental forum can take the lead in leveraging Nepad’s professed principles to the advantage of media freedom, then future gatherings of African journalists may not have to hear such gloomy news as that in Cape Town last week. More importantly, media consumers should not have to wait for annual meetings of journalists in order to get consistent coverage of the depressing abuses of the African public’s right to know. And, certainly, many other countries on the continent would be glad if times changed and their major media crises were only about the morals of a handful of journalists. E-mail Guy Berger directly if you have a question about this article. Guy Berger is head of Journalism and Media Studies at Rhodes University and deputy chair of the South African National Editors Forum (Sanef). He was recently nominated for the World Technology Awards. ADVERTISEMENTS  Contact author: E-mail the author of this article Talkback: Have your say about this article Daily cellphone alerts: Get news headlines by SMS Daily Newsletter: Get the news by e-mailCONVERSE | HOMEPAGE |
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CONTACT US | ABOUT US | M&G; HISTORY | SUBSCRIPTIONS | FREE NEWS FEED | ADVERTISING | INTERNSHIPS
All material copyright Mail&Guardian.; Material may not be published or reproduced in any form without prior written permission. Read the Mail&Guardian;'s privacy policy |
 |
Search South Africa's #1 job listings and career advice site.
New: Investing in the Future Awards 2004 recognises companies and organisations that have contributed to society by investing in the communities of our country. Enter now!
Surprise your loved one with flowers or gifts from NetFlorist - SA's largest floral and gifting service.