media - irex.org · tion, strengthen independent media, and foster pluralistic civil society...
TRANSCRIPT
-
DEVELOPMENT
OF SUSTAINABLE
INDEPENDENT MEDIA
IN africa
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY
INDEX2008
sudan
rwanda
zimbabwe
somaliland
niger
republic of congo
senegal
democratic republic of congo
togo
tanzania
nigeria
sierra leone
namibia
uganda
gabon
benin
zambia
south africa
mozambique
botswana
burkina faso
burundi
cameroon
somalia
central african republic
chad
côte d’ivoire
djibouti
equatorial guinea
eritrea
ethiopia
the gambia
liberia
ghana
guinea
kenya
madagascar
malawi
mali
mauritania
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY
INDEX2008
The Development of Sustainable Independent Media in Africa
-
ii
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008
The Development of Sustainable Independent Media in Africa
www.irex.org/msi
Copyright © 2009 by IREX
IREX
2121 K Street, NW, Suite 700
Washington, DC 20037
E-mail: [email protected]
Phone: (202) 628-8188
Fax: (202) 628-8189
www.irex.org
Project manager: Leon Morse
IREX Project and Editorial Support: Andy Mosher, Lillie Paquette, Mark Whitehouse, Blake
Saville
Copyeditors: Carolyn Feola de Rugamas, Carolyn.Ink; Kelly Kramer, WORDtoWORD Editorial
Services; OmniStudio
Design and layout: OmniStudio
Printer: Kirby Lithographic Company, Inc.
Notice of Rights: Permission is granted to display, copy, and distribute the MSI in whole
or in part, provided that: (a) the materials are used with the acknowledgement “The Media
Sustainability Index (MSI) is a product of IREX with funding from USAID.”; (b) the MSI is used
solely for personal, noncommercial, or informational use; and (c) no modifications of the MSI are
made.
Acknowledgment: This publication was made possible through support provided by the
United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under Cooperative Agreement No.
#DFD-A-00-05-00243 (MSI-MENA) via a Task Order by the Academy for Educational Development.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are those of the panelists and other project
researchers and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or IREX.
ISSN 1546-0878
-
iii
USAID
USAID is an independent federal government agency that receives overall foreign policy guidance from the Secretary of State.
Their work supports long-term and equitable economic growth and advances US foreign policy objectives by supporting:
• economic growth, agriculture and trade;
• global health; and,
• democracy, conflict prevention and humanitarian assistance.
USAID provides assistance in five regions of the world:
• Sub-Saharan Africa
• Asia
• Latin America and the Caribbean
• Europe and Eurasia
• The Middle East
With headquarters in Washington, DC, USAID’s strength is its field offices around the world. USAID works in close partnership
with private voluntary organizations, indigenous organizations, universities, American businesses, international agencies, other
governments, and other US government agencies. USAID has working relationships with more than 3,500 American companies
and over 300 US-based private voluntary organizations.
IREX
IREX is an international nonprofit organization providing leadership and innovative programs to improve the quality of educa-
tion, strengthen independent media, and foster pluralistic civil society development.
Founded in 1968, IREX has an annual portfolio of over $60 million and a staff of 500 professionals worldwide. IREX and its
partner IREX Europe deliver cross-cutting programs and consulting expertise in more than 100 countries.
Implementing Partners
IREX wishes to thank the following organizations that coordinated the fieldwork for and authored a number of the studies
herein:
Academy for Peace and Development (Somaliland) http://www.apd-somaliland.org/
The Inter Africa Network for Women, Media, Gender and Development (Senegal)
Journaliste en Danger (Democratic Republic of Congo) http://www.jed-afrique.org/
Liberia Media Center http://liberiamediacenter.net/
Media Foundation for West Africa (Ghana) http://www.mediafound.org/
Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe http://www.mmpz.org/
Multi-Service Information Systems Madagascar
National Union of Somali Journalists http://www.nusoj.org/
Sol Plaatje Institute for Media Leadership, Rhodes University School of Journalism and Media Studies (South Africa)
http://www.spiml.co.za/
-
AAFRICA
-
TAB
LE OF C
ON
TENTS
v
Introduction ..................................................................................................... vii
Executive Summary .......................................................................................... ix
Methodology ..................................................................................................xvii
AfricaBenin .................................................................................................................. 3
Botswana ......................................................................................................... 13
Burkina Faso .................................................................................................... 27
Burundi ............................................................................................................ 37
Cameroon ........................................................................................................ 45
Central African Republic ................................................................................. 55
Chad ................................................................................................................. 63
Democratic Republic of Congo ...................................................................... 71
Republic of Congo .......................................................................................... 81
Côte d’Ivoire .................................................................................................... 89
Djibouti ............................................................................................................ 99
Equatorial Guinea ......................................................................................... 107
Eritrea ............................................................................................................ 115
Ethiopia .......................................................................................................... 123
Gabon ............................................................................................................ 135
The Gambia ................................................................................................... 143
Ghana ............................................................................................................. 157
Guinea ............................................................................................................ 167
Kenya ............................................................................................................. 179
Liberia ............................................................................................................ 189
Madagascar ................................................................................................... 201
Malawi ........................................................................................................... 213
Mali ................................................................................................................ 225
Mauritania ..................................................................................................... 235
Mozambique ................................................................................................. 247
Namibia .......................................................................................................... 259
Niger .............................................................................................................. 269
Nigeria ........................................................................................................... 279
Rwanda .......................................................................................................... 291
Senegal .......................................................................................................... 301
Sierra Leone ................................................................................................... 313
Somalia .......................................................................................................... 325
Somaliland ..................................................................................................... 333
South Africa ................................................................................................... 345
Sudan ............................................................................................................. 357
Tanzania ......................................................................................................... 367
Togo ............................................................................................................... 375
Uganda .......................................................................................................... 383
Zambia ........................................................................................................... 393
Zimbabwe ...................................................................................................... 405
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008vi
Although many panels pointed out the effects of government or economic
pressures on the editorial integrity of media outlets, some panels recognized
that this was a two-way street. While the media are pressured to serve a
political or business master, they also accept this fate, and often too easily.
-
vii
INTRODUCTIONIN
TRO
DU
CTIO
N
INTRODUCTION
II am pleased to introduce the 2008 Africa Media Sustainability Index (MSI), the second such study of the region. The MSI provides an analysis of the media environment in 40 countries of Sub-Saharan Africa during 2008. The MSI was first conceived in 2000 and launched in Europe and Eurasia in 2001, in cooperation with
the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Since that time, it has become a universally
recognized reference for benchmarking and assessing changes in media systems across Africa, Europe and
Eurasia, and the Middle East.
The MSI allows policymakers and implementers to analyze media systems and determine the areas in which
media development assistance can improve citizens’ access to news and information. Armed with knowledge,
citizens can help improve the quality of governance through participatory and democratic mechanisms, and
help government and civil society actors devise solutions to pervasive issues such as poverty, healthcare,
conflict, and education.
The MSI also provides important information for the media and media advocates in each country and region.
The MSI reflects the expert opinions of media professionals in each country and its results inform the media
community, civil society, and governments of the strengths and weaknesses of the sector. IREX continues to
encourage professionals in their vital efforts at developing independent and sustainable media in their own
countries or, in many cases, preserving alternative voices in the face of repressive governments.
IREX would like to thank all those who contributed to the publication of the Media Sustainability Index
2008. Participants, moderators, authors, and observers for each country, listed after each chapter, provided
the primary analysis for this project. At IREX, Leon Morse managed the MSI with editorial and administrative
assistance from Blake Saville and Lillie Paquette. USAID has been a consistent supporter of the MSI, helping
to develop the project and ensure its ongoing implementation.
We hope you will find this report useful, and we welcome any feedback.
Sincerely,
W. Robert Pearson
President, IREX
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008viii
Partisan speech is an acceptable component of a free press and, more broadly,
freedom of speech. Nonetheless, a plurality of media outlets with independent
and balanced voices goes a long way toward insulating the media as a whole
from direct political pressure.
-
ix
EXEC
UTIv
E SUM
MA
RY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIvE SUMMARY
TThe 2008 edition of the Africa Media Sustainability Index (MSI) includes 40 individual studies, up from 37 nations in the 2006/2007 edition. The latest report adds studies from Gabon and Liberia, plus a separate study for Somaliland. Being the second MSI study of the region, it is too soon to draw development
trajectories for the media in these countries, individually or as a whole.
This edition of the Africa MSI does show some noteworthy developments, however. For example, several
of the countries in southern Africa, the overall leaders last year, experienced reductions in their scores.
Objective 5, Supporting Institutions, last year’s strongest objective overall, suffered a similar decline.
Objective 2, Professional Journalism, and Objective 4, Business Management, the two weakest objectives
last year, improved in many countries but their continent-wide averages remained the same.
A number of common themes also emerged from our diverse panels. In particular, panelists discussed
the relationship between the media, government, and the public. Although many panels pointed out
the effects of government or economic pressures on the editorial integrity of media outlets, some panels
recognized that this was a two-way street. While the media are pressured to serve a political or business
master, they also accept this fate, and often too easily. The result is that their standing with the public
comes into question. In at least one panel discussion, panelists recommended that the media act more like
businesses in their external relations and less like public relations firms.
Our analysis below is both quantitative and qualitative, but it is not intended to be exhaustive, and
neither are any of the recommendations made here. The MSI is designed to serve as a summary of overall
developments, and a starting point for further research by local media practitioners, international media
development workers, academics, and others. IREX intends for the MSI results to serve as one tool in the
diverse conversation about media development, and to support advocacy efforts aimed at improving the
media’s ability to inform the public in the countries under study. To that end, IREX provides all previous
editions of the MSI and spreadsheets with combined scoring data on its website, www.irex.org/msi.
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008x
Developments in the Objectives
As an overall average, scores for Africa did not change
remarkably between the 2006/2007 and 2008 editions.
The continental average fell by a slight 0.03 points, with
18 countries slipping in their scores, 11 gaining, and eight
remaining unchanged. The performance on most of the
objectives mirrored the overall performance.
Objective 1, Freedom of Speech, gained slightly, up 0.04, with
an equal number of countries (11) gaining and losing strength,
and the balance remaining unchanged. Panelists complained of
many of the same problems as last year, particularly the uneven
application of laws. While praising, in most cases, the laws as
written, panelists frequently detailed the capricious application
of justice by government officials, who ignored laws and
implement statutes that contravene constitutional guarantees.
Harassment of and attacks on journalists continued to be a
problem, although several panels suggested such instances
are becoming less frequent. Unfortunately, others reported
an increase in such cases, chiefly in countries that had suffered
some kind of political instability over the past year. Most panels
pointed to freedom of information as not improving.
Freedom of the media to access and use foreign news reports
in their domestic reporting remained a strong indicator, as did
access to the journalism profession. However, in the case of
the latter, a few panels reported attempts by the authorities
to regulate who may practice journalism. Broadcast licensing
appears to be improving in its professionalism to a limited
degree. Libel, although still subject to criminal fines and even
jail in many countries, seemed to be relied upon less in some
countries as a means to pressure the media (or more cases are
settled without the intervention of courts), although in others
it is still used as a way to cow the media.
Staying relatively strong, Objective 3, Plurality of News,
generally received higher scores from panelists and its
continent-wide average was 2.00. Panelists pointed to
familiar strengths, such as multiple sources of news—even
if they were sometimes disappointed in the variety of
viewpoints and depth of news—and citizens’ ability to freely
access media. Many independent broadcasters do produce
their own news and that differentiates them from sources
generated by the state.
However, the duality between plurality of media in cities
and paucity in rural areas is not being addressed sufficiently.
Panelists almost universally point out the difficulties citizens in
small towns and the rural areas have in accessing any type of
media, new or old. Further, news agencies at the national level
seem to be suffering, and more and more may become extinct
in the future. State broadcasting was a mixed bag, as some
panels reported improvement in balance, while others seemed
to think that content was edging more toward propaganda.
Last year’s two lowest-scoring objectives, Objective
2, Professional Journalism, and Objective 4, Business
Management, stayed in the lowest spots again this year.
Although the continental average for each barely changed,
the scores of more countries improved or stayed the same
rather than fell. Nonetheless, panelists pointed to the same
mutually reinforcing negative attributes that keep the
media from moving forward. Specifically, weak economies
and a small pool of advertisers create reliance on business
or political patrons who expect positive coverage in return.
In such a situation, truly independent reporting is difficult
to sustain, even if a cadre of well-trained journalists exists.
And biased reporting pulls the media into the political fray,
typically with negative consequences. This issue is described
below in more detail.
One positive development is that more panels described
the use of market research by their media, even if it is still
rudimentary. Although media are not yet fully using this
data to inform strategic planning, there is at least, it would
appear, a growing awareness and desire to tailor content to
citizens’ interests.
Objective 5, Supporting Institutions, suffered the worst loss in
overall score. In 19 countries the score fell, for a total average
loss of 0.14. To put this in context, the next largest change in
the continental average was -0.04 for Objective 3 and 0.04
for Objective 1. Panelists generally criticized the ability of
professional associations to create real change, and pointed
to, in many cases, the absence of active trade associations.
A number of factors contribute to the inability of strong
associations to develop, such as political divisions, competition,
adversarial relations between owners and journalists, and a
lack of resources. Likewise, supporting NGOs, although these
do exist in most countries and often make valiant efforts,
have a hard time achieving lasting success in their attempts to
further civic freedoms, including freedom of the press. Finally,
civil society organizations will struggle if their governments’
support is only lukewarm—or simply antithetical—to including
citizen points of view in their decision-making.
Panelists in Namibia indicated that the emergence of an opposition political party generated more government focus on the media; they also complained about coverage of the opposition party in the publicly supported media and fairness in the distribution of broadcast licenses.
-
xi
Notable Country Developments
Perhaps the most surprising change in country scores came
from several of the countries in southern Africa, namely
Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, and Zambia. As a group,
last year they had the some of the highest scores, not only
in Africa but also in the three regions studied by the MSI.
Most of them are still in the category of top-scoring African
countries, but it is somewhat alarming that they all received
such downgrades.
These lower scores were backed up by observations of
the panelists, including returning panelists who mostly
downgraded their scores in line with the panels as a whole.
Generally speaking, panelists pointed to increasing political
pressure as the main reason for these declines, and the
pressure had repercussions not only on freedom of speech, but
on most other aspects of the media.
To explain its lower scores, Botswana’s panel cited new
legislation designed to protect national security that allows
the government to erode freedoms of the press and chip away
at issues of media ownership. Panelists in Namibia indicated
that the emergence of an opposition political party generated
more government focus on the media; they also complained
about coverage of the opposition party in the publicly
supported media and fairness in the distribution of broadcast
licenses. In South Africa the run-up to the presidential election
took its toll on the media, as well. In particular, panelists
noted concerns about on-going scandals with the public
broadcaster, including the blacklisting of journalists critical
of the ruling party. Zambia still suffers from the stalled
conversion of its state broadcaster into a public one, and
media reporting critical stories are suffering harassment and
threats of government closure.
Political turmoil lowered scores in Kenya and Madagascar. Of
particular concern for the panelists in Kenya is the fear that
both opposition and ruling party politicians are beginning
to work together to silence independent voices in the
media. The proof of this for the panelists was the passage of
harsh legislation intended to heavily regulate the media. In
Madagascar, a sharp political rivalry between the president
and mayor of Antananarivo was already impacting the media
when the panel discussion was held; in the first quarter of
2009 it resulted in the ouster of the president by the army.
On a positive note, Niger passed legislation allowing the
expansion of private broadcast media and lifting restrictions
that prevented community radio stations from broadcasting
news programs. Also, Malawi and Tanzania both showed solid
growth. Panelists in Malawi were optimistic after the media
exposed instances of corruption and the government took
corrective action as a result. In Tanzania panelists pointed to
improvements in broadcast licensing and balance in the bulk
of reporting.
Journalism Quality and the Media’s Relationships
Reading the studies herein, some common themes begin
to emerge that expose pressure points on the media and
its ability to serve as the “fourth estate.” Identifying these
pressure points can be one way to begin to unravel the
problems facing the media sector. However, the pressure
points can sometimes be self-inflicted, even if brought on out
of necessity.
Real or alleged ethical or other abuses by some media outlets
are not a valid excuse for a government to limit media
freedom. In fact, actions taken by governments to limit press
freedom typically slow the media’s progress toward better
practices and can reinforce bad habits.
However, media professionals at all levels can still choose the
tone, content, and adherence to good journalism practices
and ethics in their reports. In deciding to be partisan, a media
outlet enters the political fray, which in some countries
is a dangerous business. Partisan speech is an acceptable
component of a free press and, more broadly, freedom
of speech. Nonetheless, a plurality of media outlets with
independent and balanced voices goes a long way toward
insulating the media as a whole from direct political pressure.
In many countries the media have decided not to, or have
been unable to choose to, transcend overt partisanship.
Further, partisan reporting often leads to gross violations
of ethics. This makes media outlets and journalists an easy
target for lawsuits, which are typically presided over by a
non-independent judiciary. Many examples exist of good
reporting resulting in a journalist on the losing side of a lawsuit,
facing fines or jail time. However, it is much more difficult to
generate the sympathy of one’s professional colleagues, not to
mention the public at-large, if one is being persecuted while
also flagrantly violating standards of journalism.
EXECUTIvE SUMMARY
Freedom of the media to access and use foreign news reports in their domestic reporting remained a strong indicator, as did access to the journalism profession. However, in the case of the latter, a few panels reported attempts by the authorities to regulate who may practice journalism.
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008xii
A panelist in Madagascar gave an example of how such
reporting further creates ill will between the media and
government. Journalists reporting on the resignation of a
senior government official characterized it as “desertion.”
The panelist noted how this increased the government’s
mistrust of journalists. A panelist from the Central African
Republic said that the private press there covers “all the
major issues, but it also excels at wheeling and dealing, and
presents black as white, especially on political issues, in order
to sell more copies.”
One of the key obstacles to better reporting—freedom of
information—is clearly in the hands of the government.
Officials who suborn corruption and misuse public funds are
unlikely to release reliable public information to the media.
Until they do, this will continue to be a serious impediment
to the work of journalists. For example, a panelist from
Guinea offered this insight: “When you contact an office,…
you will be sent from one official to the other, and eventually
you will not get reliable information. So then, we must use
euphemisms and rely on rumors, because we still need to
write something.” Regimes bent on silencing critical voices
rely on this shortcoming as a way to prove media outlets are
unreliable because they print inaccurate information about an
official or government agency.
Lackluster or unethical reporting also diminishes the public’s
trust in the media and the value it places on media products.
A panelist in the Central African Republic noted that
journalists “do not treat key events and issues as they should.
Often they do not check their information, and they are not
fair. The result is that their intentions seem malicious, harmful,
and dishonest.”
Further, media outlets need to make an effort to cover a
range of issues beyond politics and government programs to
win public support. The Zambia study concluded, “Journalists
do not know what is key. They fail to identify issues worth
reporting, and simply report on who has said what. For
example, issues dealing with environmental degradation
and rising food prices rarely find space in the media, unless
another news source reports on them.” This latter point is
important, as it implies that one good media outlet can create
a more vibrant media sector by serving as a news leader.
Others will likely follow to remain competitive.
Even if good reporting happens, it often never sees the light
of day. A panelist from the Central African Republic explained,
“Journalists showing professionalism may be fired because
they bother the shady sponsors of the respective media.”
Developing a more solid business footing is one way media
can empower themselves and become less dependent on a
few powerful advertisers or sponsors.
One step the media can take is to change their perceptions
of their place in the local business environment. Rather than
serving as a public-relations vehicle for politicians or key
businesses, as many do, they should think more as a business.
By adopting a business approach to running its operation,
many outlets could help bring the media closer to normalized
business operations.
The panelists in Niger demonstrated one of the things that
frequently hold the media back, the inability to look past
competitive rivalry and secure better conditions for the
industry as a whole. “While it is the [Higher Communications
Council’s] responsibility to regulate the advertising market,
media managers can also take collective initiatives. On this
point, Ameth, the manager of Multi-Com advertising agency,
tried to show the panelists that the situation could change
very easily if media managers should agree to negotiate with
communication agencies and advertising departments. But his
proposition was not considered appropriate by some of the
panelists, who did not hide their distrust of go-betweens.”
In addition, media in most countries in Africa—for that matter
most countries the MSI studies—have not adopted practices
that facilitate solid business-to-business relationships. The
Niger discussion continued: “That crisis of trust would also be
overcome if reliable statistical data concerning the media—
such as audience ratings, print runs, and sales figures—were
regularly processed and made available to the public. But such
data is unavailable, making it difficult even for advertisers
to decide wisely which media outlets they should choose as
carriers for their messages.”
Enhancing the performance and sustainability of a media
sector is complicated, with many actors influencing the
outcome, some intractable in their opposition to reform.
However, serious media outlets, on their own, can
make choices that improve their chances of openly and
professionally informing the public.
For example, a panelist from Guinea offered this insight: “When you contact an office,…you will be sent from one official to the other, and eventually you will not get reliable information. So then, we must use euphemisms and rely on rumors, because we still need to write something.”
-
xiiiEXECUTIvE SUMMARY
UNSUSTAINABLE UNSUSTAINABLE NEAR SUSTAINABLE ANTI-FREE PRESS MIXED SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY
0 – 0.50 0.51 – 1.00 1.01 – 1.50 1.51 – 2.00 2.01 – 2.50 2.51 – 3.00 3.01 – 3.50 3.51 – 4.00
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008: OVERALL AVERAGE SCORES
□□ Eritrea (0.26) □c Eq. Guinea (0.79)
□b Cent. Afr. Rep. (1.47)□□ Djibouti (1.38)□b Ethiopia (1.35)□b Sudan (1.47)□c Zimbabwe (1.15)
□c Burundi (1.95)□c Cameroon (1.55)□c Chad (1.76)□b D. R. Congo (1.73)□b Rep. Congo (1.63)
Gabon (1.81)□□ The Gambia (1.68)□c Mali (1.97)□b Mauritania (1.93)□c Somalia (1.52)
Somaliland (1.83)□c Togo (1.56)□c Zambia (1.89)
□□ Benin (2.23)□c Botswana (2.34)□b Burkina Faso (2.14)□c Côte d’Ivoire (2.01)□c Ghana (2.45)□□ Guinea (2.21)□c Kenya (2.13)
Liberia (2.04)□c Madagascar (2.01)□b Malawi (2.47)□□ Mozambique (2.19)□c Namibia (2.50)□□ Niger (2.03)□c Nigeria (2.04)□b Rwanda (2.40)□c Senegal (2.07)□b Sierra Leone (2.16)□b Tanzania (2.43)□□ Uganda (2.43) □c South Africa (2.77)
UNSUSTAINABLE UNSUSTAINABLE NEAR SUSTAINABLE ANTI-FREE PRESS MIXED SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY
0 – 0.50 0.51 – 1.00 1.01 – 1.50 1.51 – 2.00 2.01 – 2.50 2.51 – 3.00 3.01 – 3.50 3.51 – 4.00
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008: FREEDOM OF SPEECH
□□ Eritrea (0.14)□c Zimbabwe (0.49)
□c Cameroon (1.31)□b The Gambia (1.38)□c Eq. Guinea (1.11)□b Ethiopia (1.36)□□ Somalia (1.32)□b Sudan (1.47)
□c Chad (1.91)□b D.R. Congo (1.76)□b Rep. Congo (1.72)□□ Djibouti (1.54)
Gabon (1.99)□□ Madagascar (1.98)□b Mauritania (1.97)□c Nigeria (1.58)□□ Zambia (1.98)
□c Benin (2.28)□□ Burkina Faso (2.23)□□ Burundi (2.13)□b Cent. Afr. Rep. (2.03)□c Côte d’Ivoire (2.10)□□ Guinea (2.15)□□ Kenya (2.08)
Liberia (2.24)□b Malawi (2.46)□c Mali (2.37)□□ Mozambique (2.27)□c Niger (2.10)□□ Senegal (2.02)□□ Sierra Leone (2.36)
Somaliland (2.11)□b Togo (2.43)□□ Uganda (2.36)
□□ Botswana (2.60)□□ Ghana (2.67)□c Namibia (2.58)□b Rwanda (2.69)□b Tanzania (2.65) □c South Africa (3.17)
CHANGE SINCE 2006/2007b (increase greater than .10) □ (little or no change) c (decrease greater than .10)
IREX included Gabon, Liberia, and Somaliland for the first time in the current edition.
Scores for 2006/2007 are available online at http://www.irex.org/programs/MSI_Africa/20067/index.asp
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008xiv
CHANGE SINCE 2006/2007b (increase greater than .10) □ (little or no change) c (decrease greater than .10)
UNSUSTAINABLE UNSUSTAINABLE NEAR SUSTAINABLE ANTI-FREE PRESS MIXED SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY
0 – 0.50 0.51 – 1.00 1.01 – 1.50 1.51 – 2.00 2.01 – 2.50 2.51 – 3.00 3.01 – 3.50 3.51 – 4.00
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008: PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISM
□c Eq. Guinea (0.84)□b Eritrea (0.51)□□ Zimbabwe (0.95)
□b D.R. Congo (1.40)□b Rep. Congo (1.48)□c Côte d’Ivoire (1.48)□□ Djibouti (1.43)□c Ethiopia (1.47)□c Sudan (1.42)□c Togo (1.30)
□b Burkina Faso (1.86)□c Cameroon (1.51)□b Cent. Afr. Rep. (1.63)
Gabon (1.60)□□ The Gambia (1.96)
Liberia (1.95)□□ Mali (1.85)□b Mauritania (1.98)□□ Nigeria (1.89)□c Somalia (1.52)
Somaliland (1.64)□c Zambia (1.84)
□□ Benin (2.04)□c Botswana (2.33)□c Burundi (2.06)□b Chad (2.03)□b Ghana (2.20)□b Guinea (2.20)□c Kenya (2.08)□□ Madagascar (2.01)□b Malawi (2.31)□□ Mozambique (2.06)□c Namibia (2.16)□b Niger (2.02)□b Rwanda (2.30)□□ Senegal (2.09)□b Sierra Leone (2.04)□b Tanzania (2.08)□□ Uganda (2.28) □c South Africa (2.61)
UNSUSTAINABLE UNSUSTAINABLE NEAR SUSTAINABLE ANTI-FREE PRESS MIXED SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY
0 – 0.50 0.51 – 1.00 1.01 – 1.50 1.51 – 2.00 2.01 – 2.50 2.51 – 3.00 3.01 – 3.50 3.51 – 4.00
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008: PLURALITY OF NEWS SOURCES
□□ Eritrea (0.25)
□c Eq. Guinea (0.80)□b Zimbabwe (0.84)
□c Djibouti (1.35)□b Ethiopia (1.38)□c Togo (1.46)
□□ Cameroon (1.91)□□ Cent. Afr. Rep. (1.52)□c Chad (1.54)□c Rep. Congo (1.94)□□ The Gambia (1.82)□c Somalia (1.65)
Somaliland (1.87)□b Sudan (1.61)
□c Benin (2.43)□c Botswana (2.21)□b Burkina Faso (2.17)□□ Burundi (2.21)□b D.R. Congo (2.17)□□ Côte d’Ivoire (2.33)
Gabon (2.38)□c Ghana (2.47)□□ Guinea (2.43)□c Kenya (2.04)
Liberia (2.02)□c Madagascar (2.06)□c Mali (2.09)□b Mauritania (2.02)□□ Mozambique (2.34)□c Namibia (2.49)□□ Niger (2.23)□□ Nigeria (2.12)□c Senegal (2.30)□b Sierra Leone (2.26)□c Zambia (2.02)
□b Malawi (2.58)□□ Rwanda (2.78)□c South Africa (2.59)□b Tanzania (2.59)□□ Uganda (2.56)
IREX included Gabon, Liberia, and Somaliland for the first time in the current edition.
Scores for 2006/2007 are available online at http://www.irex.org/programs/MSI_Africa/20067/index.asp
-
xvEXECUTIvE SUMMARY
CHANGE SINCE 2006/2007b (increase greater than .10) □ (little or no change) c (decrease greater than .10)
UNSUSTAINABLE UNSUSTAINABLE NEAR SUSTAINABLE ANTI-FREE PRESS MIXED SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY
0 – 0.50 0.51 – 1.00 1.01 – 1.50 1.51 – 2.00 2.01 – 2.50 2.51 – 3.00 3.01 – 3.50 3.51 – 4.00
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008: BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
□b Eq. Guinea (0.47)□c Eritrea (0.14) □b Cent. Afr. Rep. (0.84)
□□ Benin (1.35)□□ Burundi (1.27)□□ Cameroon (1.33)□b Chad (1.37)□b D.R. Congo (1.32)□b Rep. Congo (1.37)□c Djibouti (1.18)□c Ethiopia (1.43)
Gabon (1.07)□□ Niger (1.46)□b Sierra Leone (1.48)□b Somalia (1.45)□b Togo (1.04)□c Zambia (1.40)
□b Burkina Faso (1.81)□c Côte d’Ivoire (1.70)□c The Gambia (1.52)□c Guinea (1.95)
Liberia (1.55)□c Madagascar (1.88)□b Mali (1.62)□b Mauritania (1.76)□□ Mozambique (1.91)□c Senegal (1.57)
Somaliland (1.54)□b Sudan (1.58)□c Zimbabwe (1.58)
□b Botswana (2.21)□c Ghana (2.13)□c Kenya (2.21)□b Malawi (2.43)□c Nigeria (2.24)□□ Rwanda (2.04)□b Tanzania (2.21)□b Uganda (2.25)
□c Namibia (2.63)□c South Africa (2.76)
UNSUSTAINABLE UNSUSTAINABLE NEAR SUSTAINABLE ANTI-FREE PRESS MIXED SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY
0 – 0.50 0.51 – 1.00 1.01 – 1.50 1.51 – 2.00 2.01 – 2.50 2.51 – 3.00 3.01 – 3.50 3.51 – 4.00
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008: SUPPORTING INSTITUTIONS
□□ Eritrea (0.25) □c Eq. Guinea (0.73)
□c Cent. Afr. Rep. (1.35)□b Djibouti (1.38)□c Ethiopia (1.08)□□ Sudan (1.29)
□c Cameroon (1.68)□c Chad (1.93)□c D.R. Congo (2.00)□□ Rep. Congo (1.63)□□ The Gambia (1.69)□c Mali (1.94)□b Mauritania (1.92)□c Somalia (1.67)□□ Togo (1.58) □□ Zimbabwe (1.89)
□c Botswana (2.34)□c Burundi (2.07)□□ Côte d’Ivoire (2.43)
Gabon (2.02)□c Guinea (2.31)□c Kenya (2.25)
Liberia (2.44)□c Madagascar (2.11)□□ Mozambique (2.37)□b Niger (2.35)□c Nigeria (2.38)□b Rwanda (2.19)□c Senegal (2.40)
Somaliland (2.01)□c Zambia (2.20)
□b Burkina Faso (2.64)□c Ghana (2.79)□b Malawi (2.55)□b Namibia (2.66)□b Sierra Leone (2.66)□c South Africa (2.72)□□ Tanzania (2.63)□□ Uganda (2.67) □□ Benin (3.07)
IREX included Gabon, Liberia, and Somaliland for the first time in the current edition.
Scores for 2006/2007 are available online at http://www.irex.org/programs/MSI_Africa/20067/index.asp
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008xvi
The continental average fell by a slight 0.03 points, with 18 countries slipping
in their scores, 11 gaining, and eight remaining unchanged.
-
xvii
I METHO
DO
LOG
Y
METHODOLOGY
METHODOLOGY
IREX prepared the Media Sustainability Index (MSI) in cooperation with the United States Agency for
International Development (USAID) as a tool to assess the development of independent media systems over
time and across countries. IREX staff, USAID, and other media development professionals contributed to the
development of this assessment tool.
The MSI assesses five “objectives” in shaping a successful media system:
1. Legal and social norms protect and promote free speech and access to public information.
2. Journalism meets professional standards of quality.
3. Multiple news sources provide citizens with reliable and objective news.
4. Independent media are well-managed businesses, allowing editorial independence.
5. Supporting institutions function in the professional interests of independent media.
These objectives were judged to be the most important aspects of a sustainable and professional
independent media system and served as the criteria against which countries were rated. A score was
attained for each objective by rating seven to nine indicators, which determine how well a country meets
that objective. The objectives, indicators, and scoring system are presented below.
The scoring is done in two parts. First, a panel of experts is assembled in each country, drawn from
representatives of local media, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), professional associations, and
media-development implementers. Panel participants are provided with the objectives and indicators and
an explanation of the scoring system. Each panelist individually reviewed the information and scored each
objective. The panelists then assembled to discuss the objectives and indicators, and to devise combined
scores and analyses. The panel moderator, in most cases a host-country media or NGO representative,
prepares a written analysis of the discussion, which is subsequently edited by IREX representatives.
The panelists’ scores are reviewed by IREX, in-country staff and/or Washington, DC, media staff, which then
score the countries independently of the MSI panel. Using the combination of scores, the final scores are
determined. This method allows the MSI scores to reflect both local media insiders’ views and the views of
international media-development professionals.
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2008xviii
I. Objectives and Indicators
LEGAL AND SOCIAL NORMS PROTECT AND PROMOTE FREE SPEECH AND ACCESS TO PUBLIC INFORMATION.
FREE-SPEECH INDICATORS:
> Legal and social protections of free speech exist and are enforced.
> Licensing of broadcast media is fair, competitive, and apolitical.
> Market entry and tax structure for media are fair and comparable to other industries.
> Crimes against journalists or media outlets are prosecuted vigorously, but occurrences of such crimes are rare.
> State or public media do not receive preferential legal treatment, and law guarantees editorial independence.
> Libel is a civil law issue; public officials are held to higher standards, and offended parties must prove falsity and malice.
> Public information is easily accessible; right of access to information is equally enforced for all media and journalists.
> Media outlets have unrestricted access to information; this is equally enforced for all media and journalists.
> Entry into the journalism profession is free, and government imposes no licensing, restrictions, or special rights for journalists.
JOURNALISM MEETS PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS OF qUALITY.
PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISM INDICATORS:
> Reporting is fair, objective, and well sourced.
> Journalists follow recognized and accepted ethical standards.
> Journalists and editors do not practice self-censorship.
> Journalists cover key events and issues.
> Pay levels for journalists and other media professionals are sufficiently high to discourage corruption.
> Entertainment programming does not eclipse news and information programming.
> Technical facilities and equipment for gathering, producing, and distributing news are modern and efficient.
> quality niche reporting and programming exists (investigative, economics/business, local, political).
MULTIPLE NEWS SOURCES PROvIDE CITIZENS WITH RELIABLE AND OBJECTIvE NEWS.
PLURALITY OF NEWS SOURCES INDICATORS:
> A plurality of affordable public and private news sources (e.g., print, broadcast, Internet) exists.
> Citizens’ access to domestic or international media is not restricted.
> State or public media reflect the views of the entire political spectrum, are nonpartisan, and serve the public interest.
> Independent news agencies gather and distribute news for print and broadcast media.
> Independent broadcast media produce their own news programs.
> Transparency of media ownership allows consumers to judge objectivity of news; media ownership is not concentrated in a few conglomerates.
> A broad spectrum of social interests are reflected and represented in the media, including minority-language information sources.
INDEPENDENT MEDIA ARE WELL-MANAGED BUSINESSES, ALLOWING EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE.
BUSINESS MANAGEMENT INDICATORS:
> Media outlets and supporting firms operate as efficient, professional, and profit-generating businesses.
> Media receive revenue from a multitude of sources.
> Advertising agencies and related industries support an advertising market.
> Advertising revenue as a percentage of total revenue is in line with accepted standards at commercial outlets.
> Independent media do not receive government subsidies.
> Market research is used to formulate strategic plans, enhance advertising revenue, and tailor products to the needs and interests of audiences.
> Broadcast ratings and circulation figures are reliably and independently produced.
-
xixMETHODOLOGY
II. Scoring System
A. Indicator Scoring
Each indicator is scored using the following system:
0 = Country does not meet the indicator; government or social
forces may actively oppose its implementation.
1 = Country minimally meets aspects of the indicator; forces
may not actively oppose its implementation, but business
environment may not support it and government or profession
do not fully and actively support change.
2 = Country has begun to meet many aspects of the indicator,
but progress may be too recent to judge or still dependent on
current government or political forces.
3 = Country meets most aspects of the indicator; implementation
of the indicator has occurred over several years and/or through
changes in government, indicating likely sustainability.
4 = Country meets the aspects of the indicator; implementation
has remained intact over multiple changes in government,
economic fluctuations, changes in public opinion, and/or
changing social conventions.
B. Objective and Overall Scoring
The averages of all the indicators are then averaged to obtain
a single, overall score for each objective. Objective scores are
averaged to provide an overall score for the country. IREX
interprets the overall scores as follows:
Unsustainable, Anti-Free Press (0-1): Country does not meet or
only minimally meets objectives. Government and laws actively
hinder free media development, professionalism is low, and
media-industry activity is minimal.
Unsustainable Mixed System (1-2): Country minimally meets
objectives, with segments of the legal system and government
opposed to a free media system. Evident progress in free-press
advocacy, increased professionalism, and new media businesses
may be too recent to judge sustainability.
Near Sustainability (2-3): Country has progressed in meeting
multiple objectives, with legal norms, professionalism, and
the business environment supportive of independent media.
Advances have survived changes in government and have
been codified in law and practice. However, more time may
be needed to ensure that change is enduring and that
increased professionalism and the media business environment
are sustainable.
Sustainable (3-4): Country has media that are considered
generally professional, free, and sustainable, or to be approaching
these objectives. Systems supporting independent media have
survived multiple governments, economic fluctuations, and
changes in public opinion or social conventions.
SUPPORTING INSTITUTIONS FUNCTION IN THE PROFESSIONAL INTERESTS OF INDEPENDENT MEDIA.
SUPPORTING INSTITUTIONS INDICATORS:
> Trade associations represent the interests of private media owners and provide member services.
> Professional associations work to protect journalists’ rights.
> NGOs support free speech and independent media.
> quality journalism degree programs that provide substantial practical experience exist.
> Short-term training and in-service training programs allow journalists to upgrade skills or acquire new skills.
> Sources of newsprint and printing facilities are in private hands, apolitical, and unrestricted.
> Channels of media distribution (kiosks, transmitters, Internet) are private, apolitical, and unrestricted.
-
AAFRICA
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 20082
Leading journalists pointed to the dispute between the executive branch and
the Higher Audio-Visual and Communications Authority (HAVCA) as a
particularly ominous sign that the government of Benin—viewed widely as
one of Africa’s most stable democracies—was seeking to exert control over the
broadcast media.
BENIN
-
3
INTRODUCTION
BENIN
JJust two years after Beninese media were rated the freest in Africa by Reporters Without Borders, press freedom in the tiny West African country is on a downturn that shows little sign of reversing. Reporters Without Borders’ 2008 rankings listed Benin 11th in press freedom among African nations, falling from its ninth-place ranking
in 2007. Late in 2008, a Beninese media workers’ union issued a statement documenting a host of rights
infringements: imprisonments, beatings, and police interrogations of journalists; politically motivated transfers
of journalists working for state media; the forming of non-aggression and propaganda agreements between
the office of President Thomas Boni Yayi and the media; and the conflict between the executive branch and the
agency that regulates media, regarding the granting of frequencies to new television and radio stations.
Leading journalists pointed to the dispute between the executive branch and the Higher Audio-visual and
Communications Authority (HAvCA) as a particularly ominous sign that the government of Benin—viewed
widely as one of Africa’s most stable democracies—was seeking to exert control over the broadcast media.
The conflict, which came to be known as “the war of the frequencies,” highlighted the serious risks that
arise when the institutions responsible for enforcing media law fight over interpretations.
The dispute began to unfold on January 30, 2008, when HAvCA granted new frequencies to the winners
of a competition for the installation and operation of private radio and television stations. Three days
later, the minister in charge of communications and information technology expressed disapproval of
the procedures that led to the granting of the new frequencies, and the government asked the Benin
Constitutional Court to overturn HAvCA’s decision. The government claimed that HAvCA could not grant
new frequencies without the ministry’s technical approval, and said that the ministry “is clearly opposed
to any new frequency granting for legal, technical, and security reasons.” Though HAvCA cited legislation
dating to 1997 that granted the agency discretion to award frequencies, the court ruled in favor of the
ministry at the end of February, saying that HAvCA had violated the constitution.
Troubling signs about the future of Beninese media have emerged from within the journalism profession as
well. Journalists continue to work under deplorable conditions, and the quality of their work has suffered.
Media advocates acknowledge that reporting is often incomplete or biased—a situation they attribute to
low pay, poor management, and pressure from powerful individuals inside and outside of government.
Benin’s overall MSI score is essentially unchanged compared to last year, although objective scores showed
some movement. Objective 1, freedom of speech, and Objective 3, plurality of news sources, both received
slightly lower scores; while the other three objectives remained more or less the same. The range of scores
also remained similar to last year, with Objective 4, business management, receiving by far the worst score;
and Objective 5, supporting institutions, receiving the best score. The other objectives fell in the lower half
of the “near sustainability” range.
BENIN
OVERALLSCORE:2.23
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 20084
BENIN AT A GLANCEMEDIA-SPECIFIC
> Number of active print outlets, radio stations, television stations: Print: 53 total (28 daily newspapers, 25 periodicals); Radio: 73; Television Stations: 5, including 1 public channel
> Newspaper circulation statistics: Top three by circulation: La Nation (state-owned), Le Matinal (private), Fraternité (privately owned)
> Broadcast ratings: Top three radio stations: National Radio (state-owned), Golfe FM (state-owned), Capp FM
> Television channel ratings: Top three: National television (public channel), Canal3 (privately-owned channel), Golfe Tv (privately-owned).
> News agencies: Agence Bénin Presse (state-owned), Agence de presse Médiane Afrique (private), Agence Proximités (privatly owned)
> Annual advertising revenue in media sector: N/A
> Internet usage: 150,000 (2007 est., CIA World Factbook)
GENERAL
> Population: 8,791,832 (14 May, 2009 est., CIA World Factbook)
> Capital city: Porto-Novo
> Ethnic groups (% of population): Fon 39.2%, Adja 15.2%, Yoruba 12.3%, Bariba 9.2%, Peulh 7%, Ottamari 6.1%, Yoa-Lokpa 4%, Dendi 2.5%, other 1.6%, unspecified 2.9% (2002 census, CIA World Factbook)
> Religions (% of population): Christian 42.8%, Muslim 24.4%, vodoun 17.3%, other 15.5% (2002 census, CIA World Factbook)
> Languages (% of population): French (official), Fon and Yoruba (most common vernaculars in south), tribal languages (at least six major ones in north) (CIA World Factbook)
> GNI (2008-Atlas): $5.120 billion (World Bank Development Indicators, revised 2009)
> GNI per capita (2008-PPP): $1,310 (World Bank Development Indicators, 2009)
> Literacy rate: 34.7% (male 47.9%, female 23.3%) (2002 census, CIA World Factbook)
> President or top authority: President Thomas Yayi Boni (since April 6, 2006)
2.45
2.28
1.95 2.
04
2.70
2.43
1.29 1.35
3.02 3.07
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2006
-07
2006
-07
2006
-07
2006
-07
2006
-07
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX: BENIN
SUST
AIN
AB
ILIT
Y
OBJECTIVES
UN
SUST
AIN
ABL
EM
IXED
SYS
TEM
NEA
RSU
STA
INA
BILI
TYSU
STA
INA
BLE
UN
SUST
AIN
ABL
EA
NTI
-FRE
E PR
ESS
Unsustainable, Anti-Free Press (0-1): Country does not meet or only minimally meets objectives. Government and laws actively hinder free media development, professionalism is low, and media-industry activity is minimal.
Unsustainable Mixed System (1-2): Country minimally meets objectives, with segments of the legal system and government opposed to a free media system. Evident progress in free-press advocacy, increased professionalism, and new media businesses may be too recent to judge sustainability.
Near Sustainability (2-3): Country has progressed in meeting multiple objectives, with legal norms, professionalism, and the business environment supportive of independent media. Advances have survived changes in government and have been codified in law and practice. However, more time may be needed to ensure that change is enduring and that increased professionalism and the media business environment are sustainable.
Sustainable (3-4): Country has media that are considered generally professional, free, and sustainable, or to be approaching these objectives. Systems supporting independent media have survived multiple governments, economic fluctuations, and changes in public opinion or social conventions.
FREESPEECH
PROFESSIONALJOURNALISM
PLURALITY OFNEWS SOURCES
BUSINESSMANAGEMENT
SUPPORTINGINSTITUTIONS
-
5BENIN
OBJECTIVE 1: FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Benin Objective Score: 2.28
Benin’s freedom of speech score slipped slightly compared
to last year, as the scores fell for a number of indicators.
In particular, panelists decreased scores for Indicator 2
(broadcast licensing) and Indicator 5 (legal guarantees of
editorial independence for state media). Indicator 1 (legal
protections support free speech) and Indicator 4 (attacks
on journalists) also experienced a decline. Despite its slide,
Indicator 4 still managed to score about a point higher than
the overall objective score, as did Indicator 8 (media access
to foreign news sources) and Indicator 9 (free entry to the
journalism profession). However, indicators 5, 6 (libel laws),
and 7 (access to information) all scored about a point lower.
One indicator increased its score: Indicator 3 (market entry
and tax treatment).
Freedom of speech is guaranteed by Benin’s 1991
constitution. Article 23 of the constitution recognizes the
right of every person to freedom of thought, opinion, and
expression within the legal bounds of public order. Article
24 states that freedom of the press is recognized and
guaranteed by the state. In practice, however, the media must
exercise these freedoms in a restrictive legal environment.
“The constitution recognizes the freedom of speech, of which
the press is a direct manifestation. But on the other hand,
there are still liberty-killing and obsolete laws,” said panelist
Edouard Loko, director of the daily newspaper Le Progres and
president of the Benin press management organization.
Many of the laws that affect the media and its operations
date to the period before 1990, when Benin abandoned
Marxist-Leninist central controls for multi-party democracy.
For example, Law 60-12, passed in 1960, limits the freedom
of the press and stipulates prison sentences for journalists
convicted of press offenses. And Order No. 69-22 PR/MJL,
from 1969, provides for the suppression of attacks on public
order and bans the spread, publication, distribution, and
reproduction of false news.
Licensing of broadcast media has been free and open since
1990, but the conflict between HAvCA and the government
over the granting of frequencies suggests that the process
is not as free as it appears. According to panelists, the
government’s annulment the decision of HAvCA to grant new
frequencies—even though HAvCA’s equitable, competitive,
and apolitical action was not questioned—is evidence
that the government desires to control the broadcast
media. Analyzing this conflict, panelists said that the
frequency granting process was more transparent than the
government’s management of the controversy that sprang
from the grants. “The administration even dispatched a
team of public servants and policemen to cut the power and
seal off the equipment of a newly licensed radio station,”1
said panelist Abel Gbètoénonmon, a journalist and member
of a platform reuniting civil society organizations. While
recognizing that licensees and citizens have the option of
challenging the decisions of HAvCA, panelists regretted that
the constitutional court’s decision cannot be appealed.
Taxation is the same for Benin’s media as for other
businesses—a situation long opposed by media owners, given
the nature of the media and the role they play in society.
Supplies and equipment involved in production are taxed in
the same way as materials used by other types of companies.
Nonetheless, when they are incorporated, media companies
are subject to different financial and administrative
obligations according to their medium: press, radio, or
television. Thus, while all a newspaper owner must do is to
file a statement, the other media are forced to complete
full legal and financial paperwork. After that, all media
companies are taxed equally, based on their sales figures.
The panelists agreed that journalists are not murdered in
Benin. From time to time, however, journalists are roughed
up by police officers, who go unpunished. This situation may
be explained by the fact that Benin still has no laws designed
to expressly protect journalists. Mobilizing by human rights
organizations is the only response when the physical integrity
of a journalist is violated by the police. No media company has
ever been subjected to vandalism or sabotage, panelists said.
1 On March 31, 2008, after the annulment of the decision of HAvCA by the constitutional court, a delegation of representatives of the ministry of communication, accompanied by a police squad, raided a newly licensed radio station while it was conducting tests. The group cut the station’s power and sealed off its equipment. HAvCA denounced this intervention and submitted a complaint to the constitutional court, which ruled: “The measures taken cannot be construed as a government intervention sanctioning an unlicensed radio station, which is a prerogative of HAvCA, but rather as law enforcement against a radio station that broadcasts in violation of a decision of the Constitutional Court.”
“The constitution recognizes the freedom of speech, of which the press is a direct manifestation. But on the other hand, there are still liberty-killing and obsolete laws,” said panelist Edouard Loko, director of the daily newspaper Le Progres and president of the Benin press management organization.
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 20086
The law states clearly that all journalists should have access
to news sources, but those working for state media generally
enjoy exceptional favoritism, as long as they are not covering
news that is damaging to the interests of the authorities.
They also have greater access to news events involving the
government. Such favoritism may explain why journalists from
the state media and public broadcasters believe that they
must ally themselves with members of the government or
other politicians, who appoint their managers. The need for
government advertising and other support discourages state
media managers from upsetting their influential patrons.
In Benin, libel is considered a media offense if it allegedly is
committed through the media, and a common law offense if
by other means. Civil law cases place the burden of proof on
the plaintiff, but when the media are involved, the defendant
journalist must show that the alleged slander is true. Panelists
said that it is difficult for a journalist to provide evidence
because of the length of the process and the nature of the
required documents. The journalist has seven days from the
notification that a case has been submitted to the court to
notify the attorney general or the plaintiff of the facts he
or she intends to prove as true, as well as provide copies
of all documents and names and addresses of witnesses.
Journalists typically have difficulty obtaining the necessary
copies, especially if the documents are in the hands of the
government. Also, not many journalists dare to appear in
court and testify against a well-known person.
The principle of free access to information is stated in Law
No. 92-021, but no further regulations detail how such access
works in practice. Journalists must find a way to acquire the
information that they seek. Furthermore, any information
that a journalist has that has been labeled as “confidential,”
regardless of the necessity of keeping it secret, can result in a
jail sentence.
Access to international news is not restricted. The Beninese
media surf the Internet for news, and some use news
from the Internet and broadcast news agencies based
on a partnership agreement with almost no financial
compensation. Dispatches from the international news
agencies are rarely used by the Beninese media because of
the extremely high subscription rates. Foreign publications,
particularly from neighboring Nigeria, are widely distributed
in the capital city of Cotonou without controls or restrictions,
despite existing legal provisions to this effect.
Panelists recognized that no law restricts access to the
journalistic profession. The government influences neither
admission to journalism schools nor recruitment of journalists
by media outlets. It has no influence on professional
associations. However, by regulating the issuance of press cards,
HAvCA has in effect set forth criteria determining who can
be a journalist. In addition, special accreditation is required to
cover certain events (heads of state meetings, national holidays,
etc.) and is issued by the relevant government agencies. But
“governmental control stops there, and such control within the
event sites is simply for security reasons,” according to panelist
Célestin Akpovo, a university professor, former journalist, and
president of the private press union of Benin.
OBJECTIVE 2: PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISM
Benin Objective Score: 2.04
Although overall the score for this objective showed little
change, the panelists did assess some of the indicators
differently this year. Indicators 1 (reporting is fair and
well-sourced), 3 (self-censorship), and 4 (journalists cover
key events) showed improvement, while Indicator 6 (balance
of entertainment and news) and Indicator 7 (modern
equipment) ended up with lower scores. Most of the
LEGAL AND SOCIAL NORMS PROTECT AND PROMOTE FREE SPEECH AND ACCESS TO PUBLIC INFORMATION.
FREE-SPEECH INDICATORS:
> Legal and social protections of free speech exist and are enforced.
> Licensing of broadcast media is fair, competitive, and apolitical.
> Market entry and tax structure for media are fair and comparable to other industries.
> Crimes against journalists or media outlets are prosecuted vigorously, but occurrences of such crimes are rare.
> State or public media do not receive preferential legal treatment, and law guarantees editorial independence.
> Libel is a civil law issue; public officials are held to higher standards, and offended parties must prove falsity and malice.
> Public information is easily accessible; right of access to information is equally enforced for all media and journalists.
> Media outlets have unrestricted access to information; this is equally enforced for all media and journalists.
> Entry into the journalism profession is free, and government imposes no licensing, restrictions, or special rights for journalists.
“Sometimes we have felt ashamed by the work of our fellow journalists,” said François Awoudo, a journalist and former president of the Observatory for Ethics and Responsibility in Media.
-
7BENIN
indicators stayed within a half point of the overall score,
with two exceptions: Indicator 4 scored about a point higher,
while Indicator 5 (pay levels for journalists) was again the
lowest-scoring indicator, coming in about a point lower than
the overall objective score.
Beninese journalists’ work is not rigorous. While panelists
acknowledged that factors outside of newsrooms influence
the quality of the journalists’ work, they also recognized
that journalists could hardly do better jobs because of their
undesirable work and living conditions.
Journalists are most often accused of not checking and
verifying information sufficiently. Many people complain that
journalists do not work hard enough to get to know all sides
of a story before reporting the story. Panelists said that it is
awkward to see people who are granted a right of response
lecturing journalists on journalism. “Sometimes we have felt
ashamed by the work of our fellow journalists,” said François
Awoudo, a journalist and former president of the Observatory
for Ethics and Responsibility in Media.
Some panelists said that journalists—particularly younger
ones—are offered per diem allowances and other gifts in the
hope that they will skew their articles in a certain direction.
Clément Adéchian, managing editor of the daily newspaper
L’Informateur, asked the participants, “How can you expect
a paid report to be fair?” But Loko called that “a borderline,
half-true excuse.” According to him, money and gifts do not
always explain the mistakes in the Beninese media.
The panelists said that another weakness of journalists is
that they do not prepare sufficiently for broadcast debates
or other discussions. Either the journalist has no command
of the topic or the guest is oblivious to it. Panelist Urbain
Amégbédji, an NGO leader, said that there are a rare few
journalists who do an admirable job leading a debate or
conducting an interview.
The Beninese media adopted a code of ethics in September
1999. The code follows the example of other African
countries and takes on the pivotal issues of the profession.
Through training sessions, media professionals have been
made aware of the contents of the code, although there
are still some opponents to it. The code is regularly violated,
often through the publication of false news, slander, false
accusations, and mixtures of facts and hearsay.
Self-censorship, said Maurille Agbokou, managing director
of the daily newspaper Adjinakou, “is part of the trade. Not
everything is said out loud. But journalists often practice
self-censorship because there is a threat from the outside.”
Often, journalists do not discuss some topics for fear of
ending up in court. But more frequently, they are afraid
of upsetting business relations with certain companies by
writing about certain topics that might be damaging to the
companies—particularly advertisers. For example, there are
publication managers who were not able to renew their
contracts with a state-run company because they dared to
expose the obsolete nature of its infrastructure. When big
commercial and financial advantages are at play, the owner
of the media outlet will give indications, or even orders,
about how a topic must be covered, if at all. “If my journalist
does not walk the line, I will sack him to protect the interests
of the company,” Adéchain concluded.
Self-censorship aside, panelists were unanimous that there
is no outright taboo topic in the Beninese media. Some
topics are addressed with caution, such as those subject to
legal restrictions and those that can only be addressed with
caution, such as national defense and safety, and pending
court cases.
Salaries among Beninese media fall into two categories:
journalists in the state media that are employed and paid
regularly, and those in the private media who receive virtually
no salary. In the private media, the poor salary structure
favors corruption. Some outlets even ask event organizers to
pay reporters’ transportation and bed and board expenses. To
survive, some journalists agree to write stories proposed by
politicians in exchange for money.
To limit corruption in sensitive sectors such as justice and
tax administration, the Beninese government substantially
increased the magistrates’ and tax agents’ salaries, yet no
such steps have ever been taken with journalists’ salaries.
All the broadcast media have specific time slots for news
but dedicate more airtime for entertainment programming
JOURNALISM MEETS PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS OF qUALITY.
PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISM INDICATORS:
> Reporting is fair, objective, and well sourced.
> Journalists follow recognized and accepted ethical standards.
> Journalists and editors do not practice self-censorship.
> Journalists cover key events and issues.
> Pay levels for journalists and other media professionals are sufficiently high to discourage corruption.
> Entertainment programming does not eclipse news and information programming.
> Technical facilities and equipment for gathering, producing, and distributing news are modern and efficient.
> quality niche reporting and programming exists (investigative, economics/business, local, political).
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 20088
(interactive and reality shows). In a typical 24-hour period,
only a third of the time is used for newscasts and the rest is
entertainment.
Equipment quality in the written press has improved, but
the broadcast sector has serious equipment problems. The
image quality on television programs is an indicator the
obsolete technical equipment (cameras and editing rooms)
being used. Radio stations still use analog recorders, which
affects the sound quality of reports and shows produced
outside the studio.
All newspapers have correspondents throughout the country
who send in field reports. The same is true for television
stations, which have transmitters in the larger inland
cities. But the production issue is tied to the availability of
personnel and materials. Many panelists said that the state
broadcast media address topics much more selectively and
acknowledge all the country’s ethnic groups. In contrast,
all local (private, commercial, or community) radio stations
produce shows that are potentially interesting to ethnic
groups living only in their coverage area.
OBJECTIVE 3: PLURALITY OF NEWS
Benin Objective Score: 2.43
This objective experienced a modest drop in score, from
2.70 to 2.43. The change was caused by lower scores in four
indicators: 1 (plurality of news sources), 2 (citizen access to
media), 3 (objectivity of state media), and 6 (transparency
of media ownership). Indicators 3 and 6 represented the
lowest-scoring indicators, coming in a point lower than the
overall objective score. Indicator 2 and Indicator 7 (media
coverage of minority issues) scored higher by a point and a
half-point, respectively.
Despite a strong presence in urban areas, the written press still
struggles to reach rural populations because of an undeveloped
distribution system. This shortcoming is compensated by local
radio stations, which relay the news published in newspapers in
their news reports and press reviews.
Citizens’ access to national and international, audio-visual,
and written media is unlimited. Access to the Internet is free
of restrictions, but panelists pointed out that the Internet
is accessed only by a very few, due to lack of financial and
technical means. The government has exempted all imported
computers from customs tax.
The panelists agreed that the state media do a great deal
for cultural promotion. But they also said that the state
media do not reflect the full spectrum of public opinion
and are influenced by the government. The state appoints
media managers, and the airtime dedicated to the activities
and viewpoints of members of government is much greater
than the airtime allotted to opposition parties and apolitical
organizations. However, within a hierarchy that aims to
please the government, a few journalists are fighting so that
the state media fulfill their public service obligations.
Benin has two private press agencies, Médiane Afrique and
Proximités. Because they are having trouble making their
services profitable, they also conduct such secondary activities
as training, studies, and research. Limited revenues do not
allow newspapers to use the services of a press agency.
Instead, they use information they find on the Internet.
In a highly competitive environment, private radio stations
provide programming targeted to the populations living in
their coverage areas. But in terms of quality, these productions
cannot be compared to the national radio stations’
productions, which are dedicated to a larger audience.
Determining the financial sources of private media is
difficult. The true owners hide behind dummy corporations,
so the public cannot measure the degree of objectivity of the
MULTIPLE NEWS SOURCES PROvIDE CITIZENS WITH RELIABLE AND OBJECTIvE NEWS.
PLURALITY OF NEWS SOURCES INDICATORS:
> A plurality of affordable public and private news sources (e.g., print, broadcast, Internet) exists.
> Citizens’ access to domestic or international media is not restricted.
> State or public media reflect the views of the entire political spectrum, are nonpartisan, and serve the public interest.
> Independent news agencies gather and distribute news for print and broadcast media.
> Independent broadcast media produce their own news programs.
> Transparency of media ownership allows consumers to judge objectivity of news; media ownership is not concentrated in a few conglomerates.
> A broad spectrum of social interests are reflected and represented in the media, including minority-language information sources.
The panelists agreed that the state media do a great deal for cultural promotion. But they also said that the state media do not reflect the full spectrum of public opinion and are influenced by the government.
-
9BENIN
news distributed by these outlets. Sometimes politicians or
businesspeople try to use the media to protect their interests,
seeking to influence editorial content. Panelists knew of no
foreign investment in Beninese media at present.
Beninese media are subject to only a few (mostly
socio-cultural) restrictions on certain topics. Most social
interests are represented, through local radio stations
with cultural or religious programming and press outlets
specializing in areas such as finance, education and sports.
OBJECTIVE 4: BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
Benin Objective Score: 1.35
Panelists rated this objective about the same as last year,
although four indicators did change notably. Panelists gave
better scores to indicators 3 (advertising agencies) and 4
(proportion of advertising to other revenue sources), but the
scores for indicators 1 (media are well-managed businesses)
and 7 (audience and circulation measurement) both
worsened. Indicator 4 scored about three-quarters of a point
higher than the overall objective score, while Indicator 5
(government subsidies for private media) scored more than a
point higher. Indicators 6 (market research) and 7 both scored
more than a point lower.
Private media outlets are neither efficient nor profitable.
All panelists agreed that media companies’ revenues are
insignificant compared to companies in other sectors.
Accounting departments have no business plans, and their
personnel are insufficiently qualified and often mixed with
sales and administrative departments. With community
media, the situation is so difficult that sometimes municipal
governments must provide financial support.
Media derive revenue from advertising and communication
campaigns and, in the case of print media, circulation.
The government also provides funding to media outlets,
which HAvCA grants very selectively to outlets that meet
certain criteria. “Yes, the media receive subsidies, but they
do not allow themselves to be influenced by the subsidy
distribution,” Awoudo said, and other panelists agreed.
Because funds are divided among an increasing number of
media outlets every year, the subsidy received by each outlet
is not significant enough to buy any kind of influence.
One panelist cited another aspect of media financing—
“unorthodox sources”—that strongly and negatively influence
editorial content.
Minus three or four daily newspapers that rely on sales and
subscriptions, the most substantial source of income for the
media is advertising. One other exception must be noted: La
Nation, a government-owned daily. That newspaper has the
best sales figures—all government departments buy at least
one subscription—and is the unofficial publisher of all legal
announcements. The overwhelming majority of advertisers
are still concentrated in the large urban centers, particularly
in Cotonou.
Despite its importance to Beninese media, “the advertising
market is not formalized or regulated,” Loko said. Panelists
said that in a chaotic advertising market, each media company
negotiates directly with advertisers. The small percentage of
media outlets that take the lion’s share of advertising do so
not because of superior marketing skills or media products,
but because of connections to the advertisers.
In some newspapers, advertising space crowds out copy to
the extent that only a few pages address the news. Electronic
media have a similar disproportion—much air time space is
devoted to advertising, often to the detriment of the public.
“If you take out advertising and all other operations acting
as resource advertising, there is nothing left,” said panelist
Maurille Agbokou, manager of the daily newspaper Adjinakou.
INDEPENDENT MEDIA ARE WELL-MANAGED BUSINESSES, ALLOWING EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE.
BUSINESS MANAGEMENT INDICATORS:
> Media outlets and supporting firms operate as efficient, professional, and profit-generating businesses.
> Media receive revenue from a multitude of sources.
> Advertising agencies and related industries support an advertising market.
> Advertising revenue as a percentage of total revenue is in line with accepted standards at commercial outlets.
> Independent media do not receive government subsidies.
> Market research is used to formulate strategic plans, enhance advertising revenue, and tailor products to the needs and interests of audiences.
> Broadcast ratings and circulation figures are reliably and independently produced.
The government also provides funding to media outlets, which HAVCA grants very selectively to outlets that meet certain criteria. “Yes, the media receive subsidies, but they do not allow themselves to be influenced by the subsidy distribution,” Awoudo said, and other panelists agreed.
-
MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 200810
The media do not acknowledge the importance of
market research. They prefer to trust their instincts and to
micromanage without innovations or creative distinctions in
terms of product presentation. Many newspapers are similar
in terms of graphic layout. Also, programming hardly differs
from one broadcaster to another. Newscasts are aired at
the same time; interactive shows are similar; debate shows
have the same format. Only the tone changes, or the image
quality, due to outdated technical equipment.
There are no reliable statistics measuring the media sector.
Circulation and sales figures are provided by each media
company according to what the requestor intends to do with
the figures.
OBJECTIVE 5: SUPPORTING INSTITUTIONS
Benin Objective Score: 3.07
The score for this objective remained essentially unchanged
this year, and only a few indicators changed to any degree.
Indicators 1 (trade associations) and 2 (professional
associations) improved, while Indicator 5 (short-term training)
received a lower score. Almost all indicators scored close to
the overall objective average, with the exception of Indicator
4 (academic journalism programs), which again scored about
a point below the objective score.
After the 2002 convention of Beninese media, the publishers’
and owners’ groups merged into one association that
organizes training for its members. This association also fights
to improve the economic context of the media by advocating
for tax reductions, working toward the creation of a buying
center for media resources, putting together an advertising
regulatory institution, and lobbying for an advertising law. All
these undertakings are meant to end economic dependency
and make media companies more profitable.
Also after the convention, journalists organized themselves