An assessment of the reporting, representation and treatment of external debt in Kenya and Uganda - Introduction to African Development  - Dr. Reginald Cline-Cole 

SRN: 513355 - Word Count - 1200

	Examining journalism that covers a development issue can be a useful pursuit for several reasons. Firstly, and most simply, journalism is often a useful source of knowledge. Secondly, media analysis can give us insight into the ways in which development actions are percieved by various groups; perhaps those who are involved in the administration and execution of an intervention, and those who are subject to the developments, with or without their consent or approval. By drawing comparisons and highlighting contrasts between perspectives, we can see that understandings and interpretations of an event are anything but universal, and indeed, often radically different. Thirdly, the media does not exist as a disconnected observer of society, but as a set of structures that will inform people about events, provide frameworks of meaning within which those events can be understood, and eventually influence how people will act. An assessment of media should, therefore, consider what infomation is contained within an a journalistic item, what perspectives it represents and gives voice to, as well as a certain degree of speculation regarding the possible social impact of the piece.

	The subject of the articles assessed here is the public debt owed by Kenya and Uganda. While the study of a more narrowly-focused issue might more clearly illustrate the causal relations between media and social action, several features of the debt issue make it particularly salient to this discussion. One is the massive extent to which debt, or more specifically, debt-servicing influences peoples lives. Paying off the debts owed requires vast sums of money: the fact that Mohammed (2004) considers an annual sum of US$150 as "managable" demonstrates the level of resources diverted; resources which could be used to improve human welfare. As George argues, many African states have made "enormous sacrifices in order to ensure [repayments]" are made (1994, forward ix); the media's role in evaluating the necessity of those sacrifices, in assessing the debts' legitimacy is paramount to a nation's understanding of its relationship, in economic terms to the rest of the world. Perhaps this point can be clarified with reference to the positions of Ugandan and Kenyan governments as regards public debt. Both are held to be, in the terms of Sklar, "capitalist sucess stories" (1985: 227) whose fiscal policies are held to exemplify "responsible economic management" (68), not mere "rent-seeking behaviour". An integral part of this responsible approach is acknowledgement of a state's responsiblities as regards debt-servicing, and the consequent belief that a collaborative attitude towards the International Monetary Fund and World Bank's urge towards small-state free market economics will result in long-term rewards, an approach that contrasts sharply with, for example, the independent socialist tradition of the two countries' neighbour, Tanzania. It seems that for such an approach to work, the consent, at least tacitly, of the populations will be an essential requirement. 

	The Mohammed article (2004) praises the Kenyan government's sucess in brokering a new reschedulement deal. It shares the government's optimism that the deal will allow "poverty reduction spending "as well as "enable Kenya [to] achieve... medium-term development". It is worth noting that the publication in question, the East African Standard, is independent from the government, yet this in itself does not mean that the paper is completely free of bias. One could suggest, for example, that city-dwelling, middle-class journalists are more likely to support the current economic policy than those in a less enviable economic position, and, furthermore, it is the less fortunate latter group who latter group who lack the stage with which to present their ideas.

	Kabakumba Labwomi, a Uganda member of parliment quoted in the Karugaba (2004) article, is clearly an individual who does not lack a stage on which to voice his concerns. In asserting that "The WB, has made us their puppet" (sic), he summarizes the view that debt is not an altruistic show of largess on the part of the West intend to encourage development, but a tool of subjugation. This argument is summarized in similarly polemic terms by George (1994), asserting that debt "provides the ideal tool for obtaining the advantages that classical warfare once afforded" - that is to say that debt is held to be a means of stripping third world states of their autonomy to serve Western economic interests. In the same article, a more specific criticism of the IMF and the World Bank is made. The institutions are accused of "ill-advising the Government on development", and being inconsistent in the application of fiscal policy: "they want us to develop their industries while ours continue to disintegrate". This criticism, while made on the grounds of alleged incompetance rather than ideological disagreements, is equally important in providing a balanced evaluation of the role of the IMF, the WB and the debt problem in general, in the lives of Ugandans.

	The articles quoted here demonstate some of the debates features in the pages of the East African press. It seems reasonable to interpret the fact the issue brings up both supportive and critical views as a good sign, a indicator a healthly levels of press freedom and public interest on an important issue. However, even though the press appears to provide factually correct infomation, a diverse range of perspectives and a degree of independent analysis, these things are not alone enough to conclude that the sort of journalism assessed here will be of genuine help to the people of the two nations in making up their mind. 

	Perhaps the critical issue here in assessing the treatment of a development issue here rests on how an article influences the populations at large. What is lacking from the articles considered here, and perhaps popular media in general, is a broader overview of the issues. While events are reported, often well and independently and so on, they are rarely placed within the kind of conceptual framework that would allow a reader to understand the meaning behind them. The issues related to public debt, the IMF and the World Bank are complex ones. Both the 'for' and 'againist' arguements have valid, important points to make, but polarizing the debate into charicatured, extreme positions seems unlikely to result in a true understanding on the part of the reader. In journalism, the phenomenon of reducing a complex issue to a simple one is by no stretch of the imagination uniquely African, but this process of simplification has might have different effects in an Western context. An assumption of a high degree of prior knowledge can be assumed in Western societies that possess a universal secondary education and large number of university graduates, but the same cannot be said of Uganda and Tanzania, and a simple presentation of complicated issues might inhibit understanding and future action much more than in the West. While it is of course unrealistic to expect the popular media to explain in detail complex theories and realities in each and every article, perhaps a greater effort to explain the meanings behind events would assist the public to grasp their importance. Each African nation provides a unique context for news to be reported and understood, and if the media is to fulfill its public-service role best, it must adapt to match these context, not blindly follow inappropriate Western models.