No news would be good news for ANC deputy president Jacob Zuma right now. But if he could choose, what model for a pan-African TV news channel would reduce his humiliation in the eyes of the continent? On offer are:
- A revamped SABC Africa reporting a senior African leader before the courts on a rape charge, (though possibly leaving out the angle of the exclusion of the media from the court room);
- Al Jazeera International (to be launched next year), which might compress the item among a pile of competing news stories from around the world;
- An independent TV channel to be financed by Nigerian investors and British government foreign aid, which might just milk the story for what it’s worth;
- A new channel linked to the African Union (AU) which would tell Africans important things about the Pan African Parliament, but probably zero about the trial.
Applying the ”Zuma test” to these options is not just idle speculation. A host of players are moving in on the pan-African TV arena. It’s bit like the flood of entrants into Middle Eastern TV with the rise of rivals to Qatar-financed al-Jazeera, notably Dubai’s al-Arabiya, the BBC’s new Arabic channel and the United States government-sponsored al-Hurra. Significantly, none of these Arab channels could exist as a commercial entity. One effect is that none can match the CNN claim of credibility deriving from no direct ties to political interests.
An African equivalent would probably need even more propping up, and the question of political agendas would be forever with it. The point is that international TV stations absorb enormous sums of money, inevitably raising questions about the motives behind them. Two years ago, South Africans Quentin Green and David Kelly closed down their five-year-old TV Africa, a commercial venture with affiliates in 19 countries. They had spent $57-million, raised from profit-oriented US investors and the World Bank.
The liquidation statement said simply that the business ”was not viable in the long term”. Prospective financial losses do not seem to daunt the unfolding of more recent initiatives. No matter the odds, last month the AU convened a meeting in Cairo to discuss prospects for a pan-African channel. A press statement said the agenda was ”to counter the challenge of negative journalism about Africa”. The AU initiative has other political baggage.
It was proposed by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who included the possibility of Nile-Sat to deliver the service. The idea has also been backed by Senegal’s President Abdoulaye Wade — who has yet to license private TV in his country. The leader of the spectacularly media-unfree Libya, Moammar Gadaffi, hailed the idea as a ”basic tool”. This project was dubbed ”Afravision” by Benin-based academic Alfred Opubor in a discussion paper prepared for the AU’s Cairo meeting.
Optimistically, he argued that the channel or network should be ”demonstrably independent; free from undue influence by public and private power centres, and insulated from political control and economic blackmail.” That’s unlikely if Mubarak and company — or Jacob Zuma — have anything to do with it. Independent of the AU initiative is the ATV project.
This week sees a meeting on ATV in Nairobi convened by Salim Amin of Kenya’s Camerapix and others, with support from the British Council. This project comes in the wake of British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s Africa Commission report. There is talk of possible Nigerian investment and British donor aid. In this vein, one observer outside the ATV group has written: ”UK involvement in the establishment of, or support for, such a broadcaster would also do much to project a positive image of Britain in the region.” The view comes from Philip Fiske de Gouvela, a member of pro-Blair UK thinktank the Foreign Policy Centre. He estimates a cost of £70-million per year for five years and recommends that the UK should pay.
If the SABC Africa’s challenges are anything to go by, financial constraints may curtail all aspirations.
Back in 1998, SABC launched SABC Africa as a 24-hour news operation, alongside a cultural channel (Africa2Africa). Pressure of costs led to a merger in 2003. Now, headed by Phil Molefe, the revival of the 24-hour news channel model is supposed to include English and French programming. To avoid accusations of South African imperialism, the new SABC Africa will have to invest in sourcing much content outside the country. Molefe says the service will indeed be pan-African rather than South African — but the reality is that SABC already needs to find R1,2-billion for the technology to cover the 2010 World Cup coverage, plus another R400-million for TV stations SABC 4 and 5.
There will be a range of pan-African content reflected in two or three new TV outlets over the next three years. But the same purveyors might not be so bullish after that.
The Emir of Qatar may well be the sole player prepared to put serious money into the game. In the meantime, Jacob Zuma not need to worry too much. There may be — if the authorities permit — some syndicated footage around Africa concerning his court case. That won’t do much good to his image on the continent. But it’s also not nearly as bad for him as a scenario with the story playing on a commercially successful and politically independent ”African CNN”. Sadly, it will take many more years to get an indigenous, independent and sustainable pan-African broadcaster that can tell the continent how even the mightiest can be humbled.