Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

New York Times has never been Africa's ally

Expand Messages
  • World View
    New York Times has never been Africa s ally By Okwaro Oscar Plato Monday May 14, 2007 http://www.eastandard.net/hm_news/news.php?articleid=1143968543 One
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 5, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      New York Times has never been Africa's ally
      By Okwaro Oscar Plato
      Monday May 14, 2007
      http://www.eastandard.net/hm_news/news.php?articleid=1143968543


      One consistent thing about the New York Times coverage of Africa in
      the past 100 years is its paucity and inadequacy.

      By any standards, Africa has been the most ignored. What is also
      consistent is the pessimism and cynicism in the little African
      coverage that makes it to the pages of the venerable paper. A few
      articles by a former editor, now a special columnist for the paper, Mr
      Nicholas Kristof, in the last few weeks, provide a window into the
      history of Afro-pessimism, cynicism and distortion.

      The writer may have intended to draw attention to the problems
      ravaging Africa. He may have been trying to show sympathy, a friend
      attempting to twitch international consciousness about the continent's
      problems. But with friends like Kristof, Africa does not need enemies.

      In pieces also published in the New York Times satellite publications
      such as the International Herald Tribune, the replay of the old
      Western media theme portraying Africa as the continent where nothing
      works is evident. Africa is broke, Kristof declares, and invites the
      West to come and repair it. This portrayal pushes the continent and
      anything African to the margins of international consciousness.

      There is no doubt that international media have played a role in the
      marginalisation of the continent. Reinforcing the perspective after a
      few days in Africa, the writer says: "Africa has largely failed. It's
      time to rethink this continent."

      His assessment is as bizarre as the solution he prescribes. He seems
      to have little faith in what Africans can do. He subjects Eritrea, for
      example, to savage treatment. To him, salvation can only come from the
      West, not within Africa. Using a series of sweeping, but unsupported
      statements, he condemns the continent region-by-region: "Central
      Africa has been a catastrophe for up to a decade; West Africa seems
      caught in an expanding series of civil wars and the Horn of Africa
      regimes are 'starving their peoples."

      He reserves some intellectual savagery for a few nations. For bizarre
      reasons, he sees Eritrea, a young nation, as a representative of the
      older African states. Eritrea, which came out of a 30-year-old war of
      independence only a little over a decade ago, is seen as the
      continent's `window into what went wrong'.

      He says parents starve their children and the Eritrean Government its
      people and rapes its women. Such sociological and political
      observations, after a five-day visit to the Red Sea nation, known for
      its philosophy of self-reliance, for being at the forefront in the
      struggle for women's rights and for using resources to help famine
      victims, are bizarre.

      The sweeping statements are based on little knowledge about a complex
      society with a long history. The question is: How do the wild
      assertions pass editors at the New York Times? Other nations served
      such savage treatment are Congo, Kenya, Malawi and Zambia. Good
      intentions aside, articles such as Kristof's, soaked in pessimism,
      cynicism and marinated in condescension about Africa can only repel,
      not attract people to Africa.

      Who wants to have anything to do, much less invest, in a continent
      where the author says nothing works? Kristof's writing discloses the
      role of the American media in the marginalisation and the devaluation
      of Africa.

      People wonder why a central region in the world is the most
      marginalised. The answer is partially in the works of `parachute
      journalists' who, with little knowledge of the nations, cultures and
      peoples, make assertions after a short visit.

      For example, the New York Times writer visited the Horn of Africa for
      a few days. In a stunning mix of self-righteousness and ignorance, he
      lectures African parents on parenting.

      In Ethiopia, he says his heart was broken when he saw "healthy parents
      cradling skeletal children". In his attempt to understand the big
      `puzzle', he wrote: "I asked how the family ate" and made the
      discovery that in rural societies "the man eats first and then the
      children and wife".

      Then he offers his grand solution: "Africans need not just more food,
      but also above all education so that families eat together and
      understand the need to look out for their youngest members."

      In Eritrea, he meets a 14-month old boy `who came within a whisker of
      starving to death'. However, he discourages potential donors from
      coming to the aid of the child because the mother looked "healthy and
      plump" and "wore a nice dress and had purple nail polish on her toenails".

      It is a shame that such a journalist would go into societies that he
      knows little about and make unsubstantiated statements based on a few
      isolated bits and pieces.

      This kind of coverage reinforces the distorted image of Africa that
      the international media have cultivated in the minds of Americans. In
      its attempt to justify the Scramble for Africa in the 1880s and
      support for European colonialism, the New York Times described the
      African as "incapable of developing or even retaining the benefits" of
      colonialism.

      Ten years later, the Italians successfully penetrated part of the Horn
      of Africa and the paper hailed the event "as a conquest of
      civilisation and Christianity over barbarism and savagery, over
      unbelief, over habits of ferocity, over brutal ignorance of every
      human law, religion, social and civil".

      In the 1960s and the decades that followed, the Times continued to
      exhibit the same attitude towards the continent's effort to be free,
      especially through armed struggle, though the tone was a little
      restrained.

      As a result, African movements had a hard time getting space or
      fairness on the pages of America's leading newspaper.

      However, there is one silver lining in this unending stretch of media
      cloud: Kristof serves as a reminder that Africans should not let
      others, especially those who know little about their culture and
      history, define who they are.

      It looks like the African story will continue to be distorted until
      the continent develops media strong enough to be heard — al Jazeeras
      in broadcast and print journalism.


      The writer is a political analyst

      *********************************************************************

      WORLD VIEW NEWS SERVICE

      To subscribe to this group, send an email to:
      wvns-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

      NEWS ARCHIVE IS OPEN TO PUBLIC VIEW
      http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/wvns/

      Need some good karma? Appreciate the service?
      Please consider donating to WVNS today.
      Email ummyakoub@... for instructions.

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      wvns-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.