Topic: The Africa Thread

[rednewbie]

As a person who lives in Zimbabwe I can't agree more with this article


http://www.tapmagazine.ca/2011/12/why-good-news-about-africa-is-bad-for.html

Why good news about Africa is bad for business
No comments

Africa - hands upraised
Ever wondered why Western coverage of the entire continent of Africa is usually a steady stream of bad news - poverty, wars, famine, 'starving Africans', AIDS, corruption, Western 'aid', bureaucracy, mob justice, tribalism - leavened occasionally by a bit about wonderful nature (love the safaris!) or football, or how warm the people are and how they keep smiling in spite of the poverty? Or even if this bad news might actually be reassuringly good news to some people, and who these people might be? Well, here's a paragraph from an article we just came across that got us digging for more:
Between May and September 2010 the ten most-read US newspapers and magazines carried 245 articles mentioning poverty in Africa, but only five mentioning gross domestic product growth, yet, according to the McKinsey Quarterly, Africa is “among the world’s most rapidly growing economic regions,” and, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, poverty rates throughout the continent have been falling steadily and much faster than previously thought.

We're willing to bet that if someone did a survey of European newspapers' coverage of Africa the findings wouldn't be much different.

Is there poverty? Of course there is? Is there corruption at high levels? Yes, indeed. Are there wars going on? Yes. Yet, regardless of the story, if you dig deeper into most reports on Africa and you're quite likely to find that the society you're reading about isn't quite as bleak as the story you're reading is trying to make out. And sometimes the report isn't merely an exaggeration, it's just plain wrong: remember the commentary CNN posted to accompany Vice Magazine's video about 'Ghana's e-mail scan gangs'? Or how, for years, Kibera kept being referred to as Africa's biggest slum with a million inhabitants until a population census in 2009 revealed a figure of 194,269? Most people don't have the time to dig deeper, so an entire continent becomes a place of nothing but misery. And if that is the case then there must be something wrong with Africans, mustn't there?

Now, why would Western journalists persist reinforcing the beliefs of their readers, instead of challenging these readers with the reality of whichever part of Africa they are reporting from?

In the Columbia Journalism Review, Karen Rothmyer puts forward the following explanation in her article Hiding the Real Africa - Why NGOs prefer bad news:

... the main reason for the continued dominance of such negative stereotypes, I have come to believe, may well be the influence of Western-based non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and international aid groups like United Nations agencies. These organizations understandably tend to focus not on what has been accomplished but on convincing people how much remains to be done. As a practical matter, they also need to attract funding. Together, these pressures create incentives to present as gloomy a picture of Africa as possible in order to keep attention and money flowing, and to enlist journalists in disseminating that picture.

She goes on to explain that journalists rely on aid organisations for the information on which to base their stories, and since it's in the interest of aid organisations for stories about the continent to consist of nothing but bad news, guess where your average aid worker in Africa is going to take a journalist in search of a quick and simple story?

Graham, based in Ghana, has this to say in a recent post on his blog Critical Point:
Societies work hard to justify their own existence. The rich countries attempt to convince their citizens, and citizens from other parts of the world, of the superiority of their system. They are steadily winning the battle to convince us that theirs is the only way to live. The need for new homogenised markets is the driving force behind this fiction.

The media corporations often belittle other ways of living, ignoring their own self-destruct mechanisms and failing to point out the benefits of alternative systems. In this context, the denigration of Africa is essential for getting Africa to come into the world-wide market, to persuade Africans to desire every bit of consumerist nonsense produced and to convince the rich country’s own increasingly atomised, individualised citizens, that their work-driven, stressful, isolated lives were the destiny the whole of humanity had been striving towards since we first waddled out of the sea.

In a piece entitled Good News Stories About Africa Are Bad For Business, the Ghana-based writer/blogger Fiona Leonard has some suggestions for Western journalists reporting on Africa, at least if they have the faintest desire to get to the heart of stories and paint a truer and clearer picture of reality for their readers/viewers. They are:

Geography
Africa is a continent, not a country, so stop writing about it as if it were. Be specific, and use reference points that people can understand to show just how far apart and how different one country is from another.

Why Are 'We' There?
Instead of writing with the suggestion that the West is "giving" Africa anything for humanitarian reasons, call a spade and spade and admit that foreign governments are investing; aid is tied to trade, aid is tied to long term economic imperatives, some of which are embarrassingly commercial - like wanting access for mining companies. Others have direct social implications. For example, investing in another country's health system has global implications.

Why do people behave the way they do?
There is always a reason why people behave they way they do; it may be cultural, historical, emotional or personal, but there is always a reason. Don't just take what you see at face value, and don't simply accept the first superficial explanation you hear. If you want to understand the nuances of any situation keep digging.

[A Western journalist who does not have the time, patience or inclination to get to the root of whatever he or she is reporting on and look for information that contradicts his or her first impressions will end up with a narrow, context-free story similar to the one they'd have produced had they written it in their bedroom in New York or London. In other words, they'll confirm their own prejudices and those of their readers.]   

These are summaries of Fiona's suggestions, so I would urge you to read her complete article, not only to get the full gist of what she has to say but also because she refers to a blog post in the New York Times by a journalist who is clearly troubled by the way Western journalists write about Africa - his post is titled How Should We Cover Africa - and explains why even 'concerned' journalists get it wrong.

     
WHY POOR REPORTING IS BAD FOR AFRICA
Africans, wherever they live, are not immune to the cumulative effect of these misrepresentations, distortions, incomplete stories and skewed reporting, not even those who live on the continent and have the benefit of a fuller, more complex picture, so eventually many simply start to believe that Africa must be inferior in every way, and if this is true then Africans must be inferior, too. It makes some Africans ashamed to be African, it erodes their confidence (which makes it more difficult for them to deal with non-Africans on an equal footing), makes them take less pride in their culture, and it makes them feel they ought to emulate the American/European econimic system and way of life in every respect, even when this emulation proves to be disastrous. Foreign = good, African = bad. Full stop. If you're a kid growing up with this belief in the air you are basically screwed. Actually, if you're an adult and you believe this, you're screwed, too, because self-loathing is a downward spiral, at least until something jolts your consciousness and knocks some sense into you.

It gives non-Africans a picture of Africa that affects their perceptions of and relationships with Africans, whether they are aware of this or not. I don't think I need to elaborate on why this is a bad thing.

It hurts Africa economically, affects investment in the continent and also the way non-Africans do business in Africa. At a very basic level it does nothing for the tourism industry of any country: On the one hand it puts anywhere in Africa low down on most people's holiday list, so who knows how many potential millions are lost to each country's economy as a result? Or when tourists do visit an African country some automatically assume that any local way of doing things that isn't quite the same as the way things are done back home must be wrong. As someone commenting on Graham's blog wrote, this leads to some very odd remarks like the American lady she overheard complaining that Ghana has too many languages. On the other, it discourages the tourism industry from developing anything beyond the parameters of foreign tourists' expectations of Africa: they want safaris and carved elephants? Ok, safaris and carved elephants all the way. On another level it encourages Westerners doing business in Africa to treat Africans as lesser, baser human beings, and to do things they'd hesitate to do elsewhere - such as being willing to pay bribes or dumping toxic waste without worrying about the consequences.

According to Karen Rothmyer it also has 'the potential to influence policy. “The welfare model [of Africa] is still dominant on the Hill and in Hillary Clinton’s world,” according to van de Walle. Among corporate officials, says Catherine Duggan, an assistant professor at Harvard Business School, the perception is still that “Africa is where you put your money once you’ve made it somewhere else.”

Karen's article end on this realistic note: ... in the end, it will probably take sustained economic progress to break the current mould. Sunny Bindra, the Kenyan management consultant, recalls that in the 1980s, “Japan got attention because it was whacking the US. It’s the same with India and China now.” Until that happens, a sick African woman in labor will continue to be treated as poverty porn, and most Africans will have to starve in order to make it onto the evening news.

And that's spot on. Remember how 'Made in China' used to be a sign that a product was crap? Or how the Japanese were seen merely as 'funny' people with 'bizarre' game shows, good for a laugh on the Clive James Show? Look who's laughing now, and it certainly wasn't PR that shifted the balance.

[HarryLabrador]

Excellent read. I have been saying this as well: I am sick and tired of Africa referred to as a country!!

[xavidub]

'Remember how 'Made in China' used to be a sign that a product was crap?'

It still is.

Good article though

[surfer. Fuck you generator.]

Decent read, and if you subbed in 'Muslim' for Africa in some of the passages the rest of the content would still fit.

It's not just the 'West' (whatever that means these days), it's quite similar in any country with a decent standard of living (Singapore etc) in terms of how a lot of its people look at another country. You just need to know how to cut off a lot of the second hand opinion based discussions before they start, else you're going to get really pissed at the lack of knowing where your own knowledge stops and regurgitated shite masquerading as fact starts.

[Sindri]

Interesting article.

'Remember how 'Made in China' used to be a sign that a product was crap?'

It still is.

Then you might as well throw out 80% of the stuff in your house because its all crap...

[rednewbie]

what we see on the ground here and what is reported are 2 really different things

[zero zero]

Thanks for posting that article. I totally agree with the idea that at times NGO's to provide a worst case scenario in the name of future funding. I'm glad that the damage this does to a country's, or a continent's, perceived image and most importantly self-image is finally being highlighted.
Don't get me wrong, as with most things, it's a complicated situation. Clearly there's plenty that NGO's do for a developing country, but at the same time you know that it's not in their interests to promote absolute self-sufficiency.

[rednewbie]

Thanks for posting that article. I totally agree with the idea that at times NGO's to provide a worst case scenario in the name of future funding. I'm glad that the damage this does to a country's, or a continent's, perceived image and most importantly self-image is finally being highlighted.
Don't get me wrong, as with most things, it's a complicated situation. Clearly there's plenty that NGO's do for a developing country, but at the same time you know that it's not in their interests to promote absolute self-sufficiency.

There are very few NGO's  that are actually genuine here in Zimbabwe.  Most of the are cooking books to release figures that justify their existence, and other are there to cause unrest and uncertainty.  I've witnessed the workings of many NGO's and a lot of them get away with murder.

[Daniel Cabbaggio]

Great read and thought provoking article. cheers for the link

[jambutty]

Has any group ever drawn a map of Africa as the native tribes would have drawn it and the countries or areas that would have been created had they been left largely to themselves?

I had a book concept where Obama left the U.S. after 8 years of service in response to a group seeking to create the United States of Africa.  He runs and becomes the first President then builds a congressional or parliamentary system.

[slipslidin82]

Really interesting articles.

I had some similar thoughts recently when studying post-colonial culture about how horrendously racist (even if it is unconscious) the welfare model of aid to Africa is.

Also about how we accept the whole 'dark' continent being painted in essentialist terms as nothing but a seething mass of poverty, AIDS and children with flies in their eyes.

As you said, yes there are some poor areas that need help but the general Western, mass media, Comic Relief picture of it is a complete racist fiction.

[TepidT2O]

Really interesting articles.

I had some similar thoughts recently when studying post-colonial culture about how horrendously racist (even if it is unconscious) the welfare model of aid to Africa is.

Also about how we accept the whole 'dark' continent being painted in essentialist terms as nothing but a seething mass of poverty, AIDS and children with flies in their eyes.

As you said, yes there are some poor areas that need help but the general Western, mass media, Comic Relief picture of it is a complete racist fiction.

I think it's very harsh to criticise comic relief, they do try and show good aspects of Africa, but they're trying to get money for aid...... Much needed aid in many cases, and happy stories don't really bring the money in (which is a shame).

It was actually wonderful to see the "number 1 ladies detective agency" on tv recently.

Not because it was any good, but because it actually showed Africans as normal people, going about normal lives inna normal way.
I'm sure it had its flaws as a representation, but it wasnt set up to show Africans as poor, disadvantaged, miserable and repressed and as such I found it hugely refreshing.

[TepidT2O]

Really interesting articles.

I had some similar thoughts recently when studying post-colonial culture about how horrendously racist (even if it is unconscious) the welfare model of aid to Africa is.

Also about how we accept the whole 'dark' continent being painted in essentialist terms as nothing but a seething mass of poverty, AIDS and children with flies in their eyes.

As you said, yes there are some poor areas that need help but the general Western, mass media, Comic Relief picture of it is a complete racist fiction.

Facinating book about Africa is dark star safari by Paul theroux.....


Asks all sorts of questions about aid, politics and education in Africa whilst showing African people as....well normal people

[kjomall]

Facinating book about Africa is dark star safari by Paul theroux.

I'm going to keep an eye out for that, Africa has always fascinated me. I thoroughly enjoyed The Bottom Billion, by Paul Collier. The most striking fact that I took from that book was that 75% of the world's poorest billion people live in Africa.

[rednewbie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16295827

hashahahahahahahahaha! i love the bit where it says that the zoo animals were not asked about how they feel about it

[rednewbie]

http://www.newzimbabwe.com/business-6837-De+Beers+and+the+fight+for+Zim+diamonds/business.aspx

De Beers and the fight for Zim diamonds
03/01/2012 00:00:00
   by By RN Bhaskar & Yogini Joglekar
Share
 
Taking De Beers on ... Obert Mpofu
 
RELATED STORIES
Zim will shock the world: Mpofu
Panorama report 'ridiculous': Mpofu
EU backs Marange diamond exports
UK wasting time over Marange: Mpofu
KP okays Zimbabwe diamond sales
Text of Mpofu speech to KP meeting
KP battles to find Marange consensus
KP faces ‘open revolt’ over Marange
Diamond body slams Marange impasse
India holds pair over US$2m Marange gems
SA backs Marange diamond exports
Chinese firm boosts Marange output
KP clears Zim diamonds for export
Biti, Mpofu diamond dispute 'put to rest'
Diamond money must develop Marange
KP approves Zim proposal

OVER last fortnight, many supporters of the Oppenheimers’ diamond empire were in a flap. The Indian government had finally decided to clear trade in diamonds with Zimbabwe.

That decision put paid to attempts by the De Beers group (founded and known to be controlled by the Oppenheimers) to cow Zimbabwe into selling its diamond roughs only through the De Beers channels.

For De Beers, the stakes are high. Over the past two decades, it has watched its control over the global supply of diamond roughs slip from over 95 percent (for almost a century) to just about 40 percent today.

Economists had predicted this would happen, as nobody can control a cartel forever. High prices inevitably encourage independent prospectors and producers, leading to new sources of supply. This has happened in oil; it had to happen in diamonds as well.

Zimbabwe was critically relevant to De Beers’ plans. Its mines produced good quality large diamond roughs, which command excellent prices in global markets.

And since Zimbabwe’s diamonds were being sold to Indian traders, it gave Indians an opportunity to cater to the market for bigger and better cut and polished diamonds (instead of focusing only on the lower end of the market).

Also, De Beers had already managed to get all the other mines in the region to agree to a process where the diamonds would be sold through its own channels. But Zimbabwe had resisted.
Not surprisingly, the country was accused of peddling ‘blood diamonds’.

Foremost among the critics who tried to isolate Zimbabwe was Martin Rapaport, managing director, Rapaport group, which has been trying to establish its diamond price list as the best market indicator of diamond prices across the globe.

Rapaport claims to be “the primary source of diamond prices and market information. Group activities include publishing, research and marketing services, internet information and diamond trading networks, global rough and polished diamond tenders, diamond certification, quality control, compliance, shipping, and financial services.”

In fact, a couple of months ago, Rapaport’s attempts to persuade media-persons in Mumbai to write against the trade in Zimbabwe diamonds by some Indians were roundly criticised by many journalists who thought it was not fair to make such charges.

   Advertisement   

Many Indian diamantaires too believe the prices displayed by Rapaport are the prices and trends that De Beers would like it to indicate, thus giving De Beers a chance to prop up the prices of the roughs it wants to promote, over those it wishes to exclude.
Rapaport hotly denies this. “We are an independent trading and listing exchange,” he says.

But then, Rapaport refuses to list the prices of Zimbabwe’s diamonds, saying they are ‘marange’ or blood-tainted diamonds, mined in the most exploitative of conditions.

“Marange diamonds are sanctioned by the US and EU governments out of concern that they will fund such abuse. While such diamonds are legal for trade in India, they are not ethical diamonds and should be avoided by responsible companies and consumers,” he says.

“It is vital that India’s diamond industry separates marange from non-marange diamonds so that legitimate distribution channels can be maintained and India does not get a bad reputation as aiding and abetting human rights abuses in the diamond industry by mixing bad diamonds with good diamonds.

“The Rapaport Group is a US entity and will not tolerate the listing of marange diamonds on its trading networks for ethical as well as legal reasons.”
But such sanctions and labelling are not fair.

As DNA pointed out in these pages in May last year, De Beers has itself been the biggest contributor to violence and exploitation in the diamond industry.

It may be recalled that in December of 1953, Sir Ernest Oppenheimer appointed Sir Percy Sillitoe, who was earlier the head of the British counterespionage service known as MI-5, to create a system that could stop independent producers (often referred to as smugglers) from selling diamonds in the open market.

Those who did not accept the price offer made by De Beers and its associates were beaten into submission, killed, mugged or even ransacked. Sillitoe helped set up an elite core of agents called the International Diamond Security Organisation, or IDSO, which even hired private armies of mercenaries to ambush diamond caravans in the jungles.

When much of these ‘smugglers’ had been eliminated, the IDSO was quietly disbanded. But, the work of elimination of independent ‘smugglers’ continued (more details on this subject can be gleaned from http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/diamond/chap14.htm).

Similarly, there were attempts to isolate Botswana diamonds, till the government agreed to create a joint venture, Debswana, with De Beers through which all its diamonds would be mined and sold. It could also explain why Congo and many other African countries like Tanzania and Ivory Coast are not being labelled as producers of ‘blood diamonds’.
That could also explain why Indian diamantaires never really cared for the boycott of Zimbabwe diamonds.

Vested interests then tried to use the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) to seize stocks of diamonds that Indian firms had imported from Zimbabwe, which the DRI said had been ‘sanctioned’ by the US.
Finally, under representations from the Indian trade, the government decided to allow trade in Zimbabwe diamonds.

“We think the move is totally a step in the right direction because India being one of the largest markets for diamonds needed a wider scope to carry out business.

“This will prove to be important and beneficial for a country like ours. India supported and at the same time pitched for clearing diamond imports from Zimbabwe as this will give us room for generating huge employment opportunities as well,” says Sanjay Kothari, vice chairman of the Gems & Jewellery Export Promotion Council.
Shashikant Shah, a diamond industry consultant, concurs.

“This move will help us in maintaining the industry demand and reducing our other costs. Zimbabwe produces huge quantities of diamonds and since India polishes nine out 10 diamonds, the countries can strike the right balance of trade, creating jobs for us,” he says.

Clearly, Indian diamantaires have now become bigger champions of free and fair trade in the diamond market than those countries which once used to tout the need for such principles in global trade. dnaindia.com

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


good read, shows how hypocritical many of tthe companies doing business in africa are! De Beers was smuggling diamonds out of Marange for 15 years before government took over after they refused to comply.

[rednewbie]

The president of malawi died yesterday (thursday) RIP

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17636393

[rednewbie]

http://www.friatider.se/shocking-photos-shows-swedish-minister-of-culture-celebrating-with-niger-cake
smh!

[rednewbie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17814861

The comment at the end of the article solidify what the author has said! My favourite comment says something like, africa has not contributed anything to society! Lmao

[zero zero]

Interesting article, that's clearly challenging a few people judging by the comments

#45 "Considering the vast wealth/resources Africa has, and that humanity was born there, they really should be the world's most powerful and prosperous continent by now. They've had half a million years... Why isn't it? Because Africans are content to bleed the West through aid, corruption, and fraud. Not to mention not being able to get over tribalism.
Africa has many problems, but it's not our fault."

[rednewbie]

Interesting article, that's clearly challenging a few people judging by the comments

#45 "Considering the vast wealth/resources Africa has, and that humanity was born there, they really should be the world's most powerful and prosperous continent by now. They've had half a million years... Why isn't it? Because Africans are content to bleed the West through aid, corruption, and fraud. Not toy mention not being able to get over tribalism.
Africa has many problems, but it's not our fault."

The problem occurs when people try to ignore history by calling it a blame game

[zero zero]

"It' not our fault"

I think a lot of the adverse comments in response to that article are due to a certain misplaced guilt about colonialism. The unfairness of feeling guilty about something you don't agree with and had nothing to do with, I think, makes people blurt out comments, like the one I posted. Utter crazy talk to try to homogenize an entire continent and don the deliberate blinkers after "Why isn't it?" .

[HarryLabrador]

http://www.friatider.se/shocking-photos-shows-swedish-minister-of-culture-celebrating-with-niger-cake
smh!

This is so offensive it's really left me utterly speechless..... to all those at that 'party'

[zero zero]

This is so offensive it's really left me utterly speechless.....

"Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth was invited to open the festivities by performing a clitoridectomy on the cake, which she did by slicing off the part of the cake depicting female genitalia."

The video is really quite disturbing. So many offensive stereotypes to choose from...

[HarryLabrador]

"Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth was invited to open the festivities by performing a clitoridectomy on the cake, which she did by slicing off the part of the cake depicting female genitalia."

The video is really quite disturbing. So many offensive stereotypes to choose from...

I've also found out the 'artist' of this vile cake (it would still be vile even if it didn't depict a stereotypical African woman) is actually a BLACK man! There are many times I wonder what art is really all about. His name is Makode Aj Linde - appears to be of mixed race. Maybe he should be sent to Africa to live amongst his people whom he has mocked so despicably, so he can learn how to redefine boundaries which he has so callously broken.

[zero zero]

There are many times I wonder what art is really all about.

You actually piqued my curiosity there

"a black artist named Makode Aj Linde, whose art interrogates stereotypical images of people of African descent."

Taken from an interesting article on the subject. My feelings on the 'piece' are along the same lines as the author.

[HarryLabrador]

You actually piqued my curiosity there

"a black artist named Makode Aj Linde, whose art interrogates stereotypical images of people of African descent."

Taken from an interesting article on the subject. My feelings on the 'piece' are along the same lines as the author.

Thank you for that link. I am also in agreement with the author. 3 points she made which I believe are most poignant:

1. So what if he's black? Just because it's a black person doing it doesn't mean he should be above reproach.

2. Just because someone labels himself an artist doesn't make it so; just as calling something art doesn't make it art

3. Having learned that Linde is black doesn't make me less angry about the piece.

[Buggy Eyes Alfredo]

Grim reading.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-violence-idUSKBN28Z0U0

The death toll from a Wednesday attack in the western Benishangul-Gumuz region of Ethiopia has risen to 222 people, a volunteer from the country’s Red Cross told Reuters on Friday.

“Yesterday we buried 207 people who are the victims and 15 more from the attackers,” said the volunteer, Melese Mesfin.

The attack occurred in the village of Bekoji in Bulen county in the Metekel zone, and the state-appointed Ethiopian Human Rights Commission initially estimated more than 100 people had been killed.

More than 40,000 people fled their homes due to the fighting, Bulen county spokesman Kassahun Addisu said. He said the county had buried 207 people.

Wednesday’s attack by unidentified gunmen was the latest deadly assault in an area bedevilled by ethnic violence.

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed called the attack a “massacre” and deployed federal troops there the next day. The military killed 42 armed men accused of attacking the village.

Ethiopia has been grappling with outbreaks of deadly violence since Abiy was appointed in 2018 and accelerated political reforms that loosened the state’s iron grip on regional rivalries.

Elections due next June have further inflamed rivalries over land, power and resources.