Africa loses up to £3.2bn yearly in inflated interest payments on sovereign debt due to persistent negative stereotypes that dominate international media coverage of the continent, according to a new report.
Research by consultants Africa Practice and the advocacy non-profit Africa No Filter suggests that media portrayals, especially during elections when global coverage is heightened, focus disproportionately on conflict, corruption, poverty, disease and poor leadership, widening disparities between perceived and actual risks of investing in the continent, and creating a monolithic view of Africa.
“We’ve always known that there’s a cost to the persistent stereotypical media narratives about Africa. Now we’re able to put an actual figure to it,” said Moky Makura, executive director of Africa No Filter. “The scale of these figures underscores the urgent need to challenge [these] negative stereotypes about Africa and promote a more balanced narrative.”
While coverage has improved over past decades, spurred on by greater African involvement in international affairs, globalisation, increased local presence of international media outlets on the continent, and advocacy against stereotyping, it remains wanting.
The Cost of Media Stereotypes to Africa study compares global media coverage of elections in four countries – Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa and Egypt – to the reporting on non-African countries with similar socioeconomic and political conditions, or “risk profiles”, such as Malaysia (Kenya and Nigeria), Denmark (South Africa) and Thailand (Egypt). It suggests bias and disparities in how newsrooms and journalists cover Africa, including in coverage of violent election events or corruption and in misleading headlines.
“Typically, election coverage is narrowly focused on the horse race between the incumbent and main opposition party or parties. In Africa, it is often peppered with stories of election violence and rumours of corruption,” said Makura. “The fixation on election drama rather than the issues at stake is sometimes driven by the desire for headline-grabbing stories. It’s easier to sell stories about tainted politicians and violent clashes than it is to dig into healthcare reform or job creation policies.”
Heightened perceptions of risk portrayed by the media causes lenders to apply “unjustifiably” high borrowing costs, even for African countries with decent credit ratings, and “provide cover” for unfair loan terms, according to the data scientists and economists behind the study.
“The real commercial opportunity is obscured from international investors because of this risk premium,” said Marcus Courage, chief executive officer of Africa Practice, adding that the £3.2bn estimate only included the impact of negative media reporting on sovereign debt, and did not account for impacts on other drivers of development such as tourism, foreign direct investment and aid.
The organisations involved in the report say that the figure, based on studies suggesting media sentiment influences 10% of the cost of capital, is a “prejudice premium” that could fund the education of more than 12 million children or immunisations for more than 73 million, “clean drinking water for two-thirds of Nigeria’s population” or help the continent as it faces some of the worst climate change impacts.
In recent years, African leaders have made calls at global and regional summits for reforms to the global financial architecture – including a reassessment of the high cost of loans to Africa.
“There is a recognition that there needs to be reform of the global financial architecture, and we hope that the Bretton Woods institutions [the IMF and World Bank] and others will be working towards making development capital more accessible to the global south, and specifically to Africa,” said Courage. “There [are signs] of real frustration now on the part of African countries that this agenda is moving too slowly.”
The African Union plans to set up an Africa Credit Rating Agency to provide a regional-based analysis of sovereign risk that shifts away from what critics of current rating systems say are “pessimistic assumptions” by “international rating agencies with limited local presence”. The agency is expected to begin operating next year.
Earlier this month, Africa No Filter launched an election reporting guide that it hopes will help newsrooms address the bias.
“For every negative story that reinforces the traditional tropes there are a hundred that don’t,” said Makura. “The question is not which one do we cover. It’s not either or, it should be both.”
Source: theguardian.com
