On December 11 to 12, 2013, the country held its fifth National
Media Dialogue. One of the topics was African story told and informed by
Africans.
Panellists included some of the region’s foremost
storytellers — Nation Media Group’s Charles Onyango-Obbo, Jenerali
Ulimwengu from Tanzania and Andrew Mwenda of The Independent (of
Uganda).
The topic was borne out of the age-old
frustration, especially among the continent’s leaders and the elite,
that, to a large extent, Africa is largely reported negatively by
“strangers.”
In most part, that it is sold and regurgitated as a
land of ceaseless ethnic and tribal wars, endemic corruption and
thieving leaders, dictatorship and disease. This, we are told,
marginalises it and steals our collective humanity.
Ulimwengu and Mwenda agreed that Africa is
reported negatively, the former asserting that Africans are still a
creation of foreigners — species mostly wired to “cut and paste” the
White man’s ideas, the latter calling for an intellectual ecosystem to
empower Africans to report their own stories.
Not reported enough
Onyango-Obbo reasoned that while it is true Africa
is negatively reported, our main concern should be that it is not
reported enough — whether “negatively” or positively.
Armed with revealing statistics, he showed that
between January 1979 and August 2013, for example, Africa’s appearance
in the world’s media constituted a mere 13.4 per cent — mostly from
South Africa, Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya, Sudan and Somalia — while “only
0.5 per cent of [the] world’s scientific publications [are] produced by
African sources and less than five per cent of content downloaded
globally is from Africa.”
This is an indictment not only of how marginal
Africa is to the world but also to the scientific community. The most
pertinent question then is not whether it is reported negatively by
outsiders — since I don’t believe the world’s media owes the continent
anything. It is why it does not tell its own story or report itself or
contribute to scientific discoveries in significant ways and instead
endlessly complains about how others misrepresent it.
I would put the answer to four reasons.
First, most African countries do not have a consensual story but highly contested stories.
Second, our education system does not empower
young people to think for themselves and to productively deploy their
God-given brains innovatively. Third, we rarely put our money where our
mouths are. Finally, for most Africans, thinking is expensive, writing
dangerous and life cheap.
It is no lie that many African countries are still
torn by tribalism, ethnic chauvinism and fighting over spoils of war.
This smallness does not allow the deployment of our minds to big things
that would, for instance, lead to the development of consensually
defined national interest around which a common story can emerge.
Instead, the African elite spend most of their
time arguing and fighting over things such as who is more “visionary” to
individually define a people and what is most important to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment