By Sahr Musa Yamba, Winnipeg,Canada
I come from a country,Sierra Leone, where journalism, as a profession, is looked down upon by many sectors of society because of the way it has been practiced over the years.
The press was the first medium of information dissemination in Sierra Leone and can be traced back as far as the eighteenth century when the Sierra Leone Gazette was established. After this, a lot more independent papers were also established. They were however short lived. The longest serving newspaper was the Daily Mail, with its publications running from 1933 into the late 1990’s. It was so well established that it became a well-sought newspaper in the region.
Sierra Leone was amongst the first countries in Africa to have started broadcasting. This was as far back as in 1934 and although this was the case, the first development in broadcasting service only took place after the Plymouth decided to improve broadcast services. This was done in collaboration with the BBC. In 1955, the Sierra Leone Government set up the Sierra Leone Broadcasting Service (SLBS). The first privately owned radio station was set up in the early 90’s. Kiss FM 104 in Bo was established in 1994. There are also a number of community-owned radio stations. One of the then most vibrant privately owned stations is Radio Democracy 98.1 FM.
It earned its reputation due to the pivotal role it played amongst the government, civilians and the rebels during and after the war years. This radio station actually directed the lives of democrats in 1997/98 when the country’s military overthrew the democratically elected government of President Kabbah in 1997 and set up the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council in collaboration with the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) rebels.
The coup was very unpopular and the emergence of the FM 98.1 radio station, which first started as a clandestine radio, turned things around in favour of the government that was in exile in nearby Guinea. Several attempts were made by the military junta to silence the radio station, like jamming etc, but to no avail. Some people even got killed or arbitrarily detained and tortured for merely listening to that radio station. The media’s role in the restoration of democracy was very crucial in the country’s history. Defying men in arms, journalists bravely published in order to send a clear signal to the junta that they were very unwelcome.
That was about the time I started practicing journalism. I was a teacher before then. And the decisive and steadfast nature of that thrust proved significant to the development of Sierra Leone. Had it not been for that crucial media intervention and the role of the civil defence forces, Sierra Leone’s history would have been written differently with military rule thriving over democracy and human rights.
Since the collapse of the one-day party state in 1992, media ‘policy’ and development, including existing plans for a new media strategy have been guided by the notion that free expression and media pluralism are essential for the growth of democracy and socio-economic development.
Over the years, successive governments’ mistrust of the media often underplayed the importance of the media in a society in transition. Using a case in point, the then Minister for Information under the Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP)-led government, Abdul Thorlu Bangura, explained how “with his pen, journalist I.T.A Wallace Johnson in 1967 crippled the SLPP. We cannot allow such to repeat itself”. He made this statement at the US Embassy in Freetown during a seminar organized by USIS, with the hope to build a strategic partnership between the media and the government. The seminar once again highlighted the underlying tensions that characterized state-media relations over the years.
The nature of the media landscape in Sierra Leone to an extent underlines the diversity and relevance of the media particularly the print media. However, this relevance largely depends on the degree of professionalism, independence and resource capacity. This, to some extent, sheds light on the inherent challenges plaguing the media industry in Sierra Leone today. That is a country where you do not need a license to practice as a journalist. The bulk of journalists in that country found themselves there not because of the love of it, but because they cannot find another job. 90% of practicing journalists are untrained and unqualified and as a result, lack the technical and ethical know-how. It was only recently, in the last few years that the University of Sierra Leone started turning out graduates in journalism, so that tells you the kind scenario I am talking about.
Overview
In a transitional democracy like Sierra Leone, the media’s role in the transition to peace and then democracy is critical. The wave of political change that blew across Africa from late 1980s largely accounts for the opening up of the political space. This opening provided new opportunities for the media through enhancing their role in the process of socio-political developments. How has the media in Sierra Leone been responding to this opportunity?
In Sierra Leone, the unproductive nature of the media, in terms of ethics, style and professionalism is often blamed upon government functionaries. This is not always the case when one takes into consideration the topography of the media landscape in the country over the years. For quite some time now, the landscape has been littered with a seeming lack of professionalism, inadequate facilities and a fragile resource base. Many journalists go unpaid. It is their IDs that “pay” them; in other words, they thrive on bribery and extortion.
There has been very little improvement in the relationship between the media and the government; this has resulted in a negative impact on the media-public relationship. In particular, a significant number of people in Sierra Leone have lost faith in the media, especially the print media. Nonetheless, this is not a new phenomenon that is unique to Sierra Leone. Media bashing is ubiquitous everywhere in the world, particularly Africa. People complain of their media, and with time the media can either be exonerated or crucified, depending on whether the public believes their stories to be based on facts or fiction.
History (brief)
Over the past years, the media has fought two battles in Sierra Leone. One is over the rampant corruption and unaccountable activities of successive elected governments. The other was with undemocratic and unelected governments, such as the National Provisional Ruling Council (NPRC), the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) and the Revolutionary United Front(RUF).
That partial opening of the media to non-governmental players has been accompanied by a systematic reform of reprehensive legislation inherited from the one-party and colonial eras. Governments, over the years, have continued to use these laws to suppress media freedom and free expression, albeit on an ad-hoc rather than a systematic basis. The ideological shift from rigid centralized control of the media, (underpinned by more than two decades of authoritarianism) to freedom and openness has yet again resulted in an inevitable friction between government and certain sections of the educated and critical media.
It is widely believed that over the years, the media has been in forefront of advocating and enhancing the causes of peace that underlined the nature of the issues that the media engaged with at the time. This is still evident today even after the end of the conflict, which explains why the media remains divided and aggressively antagonistic to the ills of the war. Recently, certain sections of the media were still preaching acrimony and revenge, as the entire world was putting together efforts and support for the success of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Special Court. Nonetheless, by 1995, whether out of fear or lack of professionalism, the media was seen notably siding with the government against the RUF. But that relationship was short-lived. Soon after, the unpredictable nature of events during war resulted in a headlong collusion between the media and the rebels leading to the death of a BBC stringer Eddie Smith.
The government, having realized the unreliable character of their once fighting partner (media), established regulations in 1998 which stated that all reports and issues on the war should be cross checked by the Defense Ministry before being printed or aired. In a country such as Sierra Leone that does not have an Access to Information Act” this proved to be a very useful weapon against the media and one that they had to contend with. The only role left for the media to play from that point on was a defensive role against two very powerful opponents. One legitimate (the SLPP government), the other, an unacceptable and faceless undemocratic force, the RUF. It was a battle no journalist would wish or hope to be caught in between. Had they been given a choice, they would have preferred being arrested and detained at the notorious Pademba Road Prisons in Freetown, than to be captured by machete wielding rebels.
Against that backdrop, most of what was written about the rebels during that period was partly unfounded, and most often driven by government. That scenario prolonged our national search for peace. As such, during the war, trivial issues and unfair reporting dominated the media scene.
Peace out of chaos: The media’s role
By April 1999 apart from the National Commission For Democracy and Human Rights (NCDHR) led National Consultative Conference on the Peace Process, people hardly entertained the idea of talking peace with the rebels. Certain sections of the print media, among them, For di People, Democrat, Punch and a few others thought it was foolhardy on the part of the government to ignore the existence of the RUF. Some journalists expressed the fact that, a force (RUF) that has a leadership that commands unflinching respect from its armed supporters, warrants consultation in all future peace talks.
As a result of their proclamation, these newspapers were branded as unpatriotic and rebel media outlets. In the circumstances of allegations of subversion from no less a body than the government, certain sections of the print media lost their balance and focus. However, as tension and atrocities increased between the warring factions, and the government came under increased pressure from both the International Community and Civil Society groups to recognize and accept the role of freedom of expression in an emerging democracy. These events spurred the media to become more critical of government activities, through identifying loopholes in the government’s approach to the war. As such, critical journalists were branded as intellectual rebels. In that direction, parochialism and ethical ineptitude crept in and so the media was proclaimed as being un-nationalistic.
While the government was hatching plans to divide the RUF leadership to facilitate an overthrow of Sankoh’s regime, the print media, in an unprecedented manner was insinuating that certain key government functionaries were on Sankoh’s pay roll. This raised doubts from larger society about the seriousness of the government’s peace move. Unsurprisingly, this angered the government. To forestall the new wave of media attack against the newly elected government (with the ominous international backlash) the government advocated a Media Practitioners Bill that was actualized in 2000.
The Present Scenario
At present, a greater percentage of the Sierra Leone media are in the hands of unprofessional and mediocre people. The few trained, qualified and highly ethical journalists who refused to be corrupted by politicians have abandoned mainstream journalism, in favor of public relations jobs with numerous NGOs and the UN.
As such the country’s critical and objective media are in the hands of very few professional minded journalists and largely untrained and unqualified people. This explains the mediocrity and unethical approach that characterizes the media in the country today. It also provides room for well-placed people as well as unscrupulous political magnates to manipulate and control it. This might not be peculiar to Sierra Leone, but it is dangerous for a transitional democracy like ours, given several years of bad governance and a devastating conflict.
In addition, the media is also crippled by lack of resources. Today, most media houses cannot boast of an operational working environment with adequate facilities such as computers, printing, telephone and Internet equipment as well as strong financial base. To a large extent, the returns from sales and advertisements are usually not enough to keep the papers in circulation not to talk of providing affordable wages for reporters. Also, in certain cases training facilities have been largely skeletal and unfocused.
The Government Media
Most of what has been said above could be mostly attributed to the so-called ‘independent’ media. In Sierra Leone, as in many African countries, the line between government and state media is thin and sometimes even difficult to decipher.
Between 1967 and 1992, the We Yone newspaper was the major mouthpiece of the All People’s Congress Party (APC) under the Siaka Stevens and Joseph Saidu Momoh regimes. Years later the Sierra Leone Broadcasting Service (Radio and Television) became the state media, under the heavy influence of the government. In 1992, after years of relapse, the NPRC resuscitated the television wing of the SLBS but it continued to serve as the mouthpiece of the then government in power.
When the SLPP government took over state power in March 1996, the media enjoyed a period of uncensored reporting. There were visible signs and distinctions between the state run media (here in defined as SLBS) and private media houses. However, this brief respite from political control was short-lived as the government became worried about the critical views expressed by the media. There had even been talk of disengaging the government, so to speak, from the running of the SLBS as well as giving the Independent Media Commission (IMC) a free hand to operate. This only helped to strengthen the government’s resolve and its determination to tighten the screws around the media frenzy that was about to erupt.
It was expected that the massive interest of the government in the SLBS would be relinquished by the end of 2003. Ironically, it is rumored that the British government (and not the Sierra Leoneans or their Government) is very concerned about the way the state media is being run. We must accept though, that no government, not even in the West who trumpet democracy, can afford to hand over a valuable mouthpiece to an opposing side. There have been several suggestions as to how the media can be apolitical. One suggestion is to create dialogue on the future role of the SLBS with particular emphasis on public involvement.
As yet no Information Minister has succeeded in disentangling the SLBS from government control, and none will succeed in doing that without sacrificing their political interest. So far the drama surrounding the effective and efficient running of SLBS appears to be beyond the understanding and leadership capacity of any one politician taking up the position as Information Minister. Considering also, the ineffectiveness of the opposition parties, particularly the APC, it is unlikely that any political debate will convince the Kabbah government to release the reins controlling SLBS. One had expected the print media to channel some of its energy into this debate to gain public support for an apolitical SLBS. However, they have abandoned this opportunity in favor of pursuing trivial issues that warrant no public interest.
The Way Forward
The Sierra Leone media, over the ten years of war, lost some professionalism by focusing only on war reporting. Now that the socio-political landscape is changing the media needs to respond to this change. But the slow pace at which the media is responding is due to lack of government effort to encourage a fair media playing field as well as the inherent challenges plaguing the media itself. The IMC that is expected to regulate the media landscape in the country is ineffective as a result of government manipulation. A weak and crippled Sierra Leone Association of Journalists (SLAJ) further compounds this.
Finally, the future prospects for viable media cannot depend entirely on the present crop of practitioners but on input from outside the profession. These inputs will involve providing support for the media in the form of training, institutional support and effective networking among media personnel and houses. In the end, qualified media personnel who have the required training and exposure would be faced with the choice to either help redeem a cherished and fulfilling profession or allow mediocre and corrupt politicians to trivialize the role the media is supposed to play in a society in transition.
Here are a few questions I keep asking myself when I think of the Sierra Leone media: 1. What is the role of the individual journalist? 2. What challenges do journalists in Sierra Leone face? 3. What is the role of the media owner/editor? 4. Should government officials be allowed to own media? 5. Should the government regulate the media so as to avoid inflammatory remarks that may lead to an uprising and/or violence? 6. Should journalists be paid to attend press conferences? 7. Does the local media actively contribute to local and/or national development? 8.Should media be looked upon only as a source of entertainment and information? What role, if any, should the local media play in State Development? 10.What role has the media historically played in State Development? 11. What are some of the similarities/differences between African and Canadian media with regards to contributing to local development, knowledge sharing, education, etc?
