Africa & the Western media.

There is a growing belief among Africans that the Western press is dealing them a crooked hand. This can be seen in the ultra-defensive attitudes taken by many African heads of states. Notable among these is Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe and South Africa's Thabo Mbeki. Both men, among many other African leaders, have made several statements blaming the current negative image of Africa largely on the foreign media.

For example, at the height of the furore over white-owned farmlands in Zimbabwe, Mbeki and a host of other southern African leaders not only refused to criticise Robert Mugabe, as the Western press had expected him to, but supported his actions. Predictably, Mbeki is now coming under attack for failing to toe the line. The dearth of direct foreign investment into South Africa, and a host of other ills, is blamed on 'the Zimbabwe factor'.

A recent supplement on South Africa published by The Financial Times, went to great lengths to lay the blame for the economic inertia in southern Africa on Mbeki's reference to his country as "two nations, one white and rich, the other black and poor." This was interpreted as racially inflammatory rhetoric, rather than what it is, a statement of fact.

The Financial Times writer, Victor Mallet went on to state: "Mr Mbeki's individual reputation was also tarnished by his dealings with Mr Mugabe.."

The questions we have to ask ourselves are the following: one, has Mbeki's reputation really been tarnished? and two, in whose eyes?

For this you have to look at how the same events were covered and interpreted by the African and Western media. While Mbeki's reputation might indeed have become tarnished in the Western media, it has grown by leaps and bounds in the African media. African journalists the length and breath of the continent are almost unanimous in their support of Mbeki for 'telling it like it is'.

It is obvious therefore that there are two very different points of view at work here. As the African proverb goes: "What is good news for the lion is a terrible tragedy for the deer."

Growing rift

Over the last few years, there has been a growing rift between the western media's portrayal of Africa and the African media. Initially, the confrontation was between the pan-African media based in London and Washington and British and American media. More recently, thanks to the internet which has allowed editors of African based newspapers and magazines access to Western publications, the stand-off has widened.

The African media accuses the western press of taking such a euro-centric view of Africa that it ends up distorting virtually everything. While conceding that the Western press has every right to focus only on those areas that are of interest to its readers, the African media claims that by taking such a narrow, pessimistic view, the western media is in fact doing a disservice to its readers, many of whom could be potential investors.

It also accuses the western press of inculcating a cult of ignorance about Africa. There has been the very disagreeable tendency to tar the whole continent because of isolated trouble spots. Western journalists feel obliged to criticise even if just for the sake of criticism. In addition, the western media's stance towards African leaders is generally hostile and sometimes downright abusive. African leaders, in this context, are guilty unless proven innocent.

The full force of political, social and economic analysis that is brought to bear on western issues is notably absent when the subject is African. Journalists with little or no grounding in Africa's political or economic dynamics are allowed ample scope to present grossly simplistic versions of events. All this, according to leading African journalists and editors, ends up with a version of Africa that is so badly distorted as to make much of the content little more than gibberish.

What is worrying about this from the African perspective is that this view of Africa is given respectability and credibility because it often appears in otherwise excellent publications. The Western investor, who relies largely on his own media for information, is thus given a very lop-sided view of Africa. This frightens off many investors who would have otherwise profitably gone into Africa.

The inapt reporting of Africa in the Western press therefore leads not only to a lose - lose situation, it creates suspicion and hostility between the West and Africa and prevents any meaningful dialogue between the two parties.

What is the solution? The obvious answer is for Africa itself to have a far stronger press than it has at the moment. This would give audiences the world over an alternative point of view and enable them to make more informed choices. With the internet and satellite based broadcasting, the day may be far off when Africans will at last be able to talk about Africa and be heard everywhere on the globe.