New report evaluates global media on how they report Africa

Media coverage of Africa has always been dominated by narratives of disease, poverty, conflict and political instability. These portrayals, rooted in colonial histories, continue to shape global perceptions and policy decisions. A recently published Global Media Index for Africa offers insights into how the continent is portrayed in global media. Produced by a University of Cape Town research team in collaboration with Africa No Filter* and The Africa Center*, the index is the first large-scale quantitative study of how the international media represent Africa.

The Global Media Index for Africa addresses long-standing concerns about enduring stereotypes and skewed narratives about Africa. It considers, among other things, the depth of coverage, persisting stereotypes and level of balance. The initiative seeks to encourage media outlets to adopt more balanced and diverse approaches in their storytelling.

Evaluating global media
The inaugural index is based on a content analysis of over 1,000 news articles from 20 prominent global media outlets, collected between June and December 2022. The outlets include CNN, Deutsche Welle, Bloomberg, The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal and Al Jazeera.

The articles were evaluated based on four key indicators: diversity of topics, diversity of sources, diversity of countries, and depth of coverage. Each outlet was scored on these indicators, providing an overview of their performance.

Our findings confirm the stereotypes that have always accompanied reportage on Africa by the global media. The reporting continues to focus on war, diseases, corruption and insecurity. The only noticeable change is in the voices that are privileged in these stories.

This kind of reportage informs persisting perceptions that other regions of the world hold about Africa, and why the continent continues to be viewed as a “troubled child” in need of foreign saviours.

These findings will be useful in helping the international media improve the way they cover the African story. They will also be useful for African and global policymakers and the broader public in pushing for nuanced coverage of Africa.

The African story is not just about conflict, corruption, poverty, poor leadership, bad politics and disease. It’s also about tourism, the youth demographic dividend and the value of its abundant strategic mineral resources in the technologically driven modern world economy.

Limitations of media coverage
Limited voices: The analysis revealed a gender disparity in news sources. Men, particularly powerful elites like politicians and businessmen, dominated the narratives. The voices of ordinary Africans, women and marginalised groups were notably absent.

The tendency of major media houses to ignore diverse story sources is inexcusable. Contrary to claims that such sources are unavailable, there are databases, in South Africa for example, that catalogue various minority demographics, including women, who can be quoted.

The UK’s Guardian scored highest for diversity of sources at 62%. Russia Today scored the lowest at 36%.

Limited scope: Most global media outlets covered only a handful of African countries in depth. This could perpetuate the notion of Africa as a monolithic entity.

AFP scored highest on country diversity. It covered 56% of African countries, while The Wall Street Journal covered the fewest, at 31% for the period analysed.

Limited topics: One of the most striking findings was the limited diversity of topics covered. News about Africa still revolves around politics, poverty, corruption and conflict. Scant attention was given to culture, innovation, technology and other positive developments. The Guardian scored top on topic diversity with 57%. The Washington Post ranked lowest at 29%.

The depth of coverage was one of the positives from this study. Despite shortcomings in topic and source diversity, most outlets performed well in terms of the depth of coverage. This included context, balance and avoidance of stereotypes. Le Monde excelled in providing context, with a score of 95%. The Washington Post lagged at 69%. Xinhua led in stereotype avoidance with a score of 97%, while The Economist was at the bottom with 80%.

Depth of coverage comparison across outlets. Global media index for Africa 2024
The overall picture shows that all 20 outlets generally performed well on the “depth of coverage” across the four sub-indicators of balance, context, framing and avoidance of stereotypes. CGTN was the lowest performer, scoring 68%. Deutsche Welle and Le Monde shared the first place with a score of 94%.

Foreign media’s refraction of the African story often follows foreign policies of their countries. These have, for decades, viewed Africa through the prism of aid and not as equal partners. The views held in the 1980s remain prevalent.

Also, the representation of Africa is also meant for their domestic audiences who are already prejudiced by decades of misrepresentation on television screens and tabloids. These audiences have been reduced to viewing Africa at best as a tourism consumption market and at worst as the epicentre of wars, diseases and corruption.

Implications for global media
The results of our study highlight the need for a more balanced and comprehensive approach to reporting on Africa. Doing so would contribute to a more accurate and fair representation of the continent, challenging harmful stereotypes and promoting a more nuanced understanding of Africa’s complexities.

We recommend that the global media outlets

• cover a broader range of topics, highlighting positive developments in culture, innovation and technology alongside traditional news subjects

• include a diverse array of sources, particularly women, youth and marginalised communities, to offer insights from those directly affected by the issues being reported

• expand the geographical scope of coverage to dispel the notion of Africa as a homogeneous entity, contributing to a more varied and inclusive narrative

• provide detailed context and background information so that readers can understand the complexities of the issues being reported.

_____________

* Africa No Filter is a non-profit organisation that advocates for a shift in predominantly stereotyped narratives about Africa. The Africa Center provides spaces for dialogue and conversations about Africa and its diaspora across different platforms.

Wallace Chuma, Associate professor, University of Cape Town and Trust Matsilele, Senior Lecturer, Birmingham City University authored the article while Grace Itumbiri and Rutendo Nyaku, master’s students at the University of Cape Town, were part of the research team and contributed to the article.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article