You must worry when your TV shows soaps but no riots

By Daniel Kalinaki
 

 

On Friday April 29, 2011, as riots raged across the country, local television stations in Uganda were twiddling their thumbs. Like the band on the Titanic that played on as the ship sank, the TV stations were showing music videos, repeats of Mexican soaps, or feeds of the Royal Wedding in London.

While it is easy to criticise the television stations for this blatant self-censorship (to their credit, some did cut to some scenes of the story or covered it in later bulletins), their predicament is a symptom of the sustained attack on media freedom in Uganda – itself a small part of the wider attacks on civil liberties and the backward stagger of democracy.

Today’s commemoration of World Press Freedom Day offers an opportunity for all Ugandans – not just we the pesky journalists – to reflect on the state of governance and democracy in the country.

The NRM government often demands (and to an extent deserves) credit for the liberalisation of the airwaves, which has led to a proliferation of radio and television stations in the country.

While critics say this was an economic policy of which media pluralism was an unintended consequence, the progressive Article 29 of the 1995 Constitution, which guaranteed several freedoms, including expression, association and free media, reflected the reformist and progressive nature of the government.

While there were flashes of disdain for criticism, reflected in the several arrests of Monitor journalists and the ban on government advertising in the paper, the wider constitutional reforms and the vibrancy of the Sixth Parliament kept faith in the pro-democracy agenda.

However, attacks on media freedom have increased over the last decade, in tandem with increasing attacks on civil liberties in Uganda, the rolling back of progressive clauses such as the presidential term limits, and the slow strangulation of institutions of accountability, including Parliament and the Judiciary, often at the hands of the Executive.

While on paper Uganda has made significant political reform, this has not always been reflected in practice. For instance, more opposition politicians have been arrested in the five years since multiparty politics was reintroduced in the country, in 2005, than in the previous two decades of one-party rule.
Similarly, at least 40 journalists and radio/TV talk show panellists have been arrested and charged with criminal offences since 2005 – more than twice the number of journalists arrested since 1986.

In a report on media freedom in Uganda released before the recent election, Human Rights Watch noted that “genuinely free and independent journalism is under threat” in Uganda, especially outside Kampala.

‘The government deploys a wide range of tactics to stifle critical reporting, from occasional physical violence to threats, harassment, bureaucratic interference, and criminal charges,” HRW said.

“The Ugandan government uses its national laws to bring charges against journalists, restrict the number of people who can lawfully be journalists, revoke broadcasting licenses without due process of law, and practice other forms of repression. Similar laws and procedures exist in other countries, but in Uganda, the government uses the laws in partisan ways to create a minefield for media owners and reporters who speak or write about issues that the government deems politically sensitive or controversial.”

The most obnoxious attacks on media freedom have been in the broadcast sector where radios and television stations have been shut down arbitrarily, with the Broadcasting Council seeking to influence content, show hosts and guests, and warning TV stations against live reporting.

The arbitrary shutting down of open-air talk shows (Bimeeza) closed one of the most democratic spaces for Ugandans to hold their leaders publicly accountable – and might explain the sudden high number of protests, some violent, across the country.

Ugandan journalists today find themselves caught between the twin evils of self-censorship and the profit interests of media owners; between an increasingly intolerant government and owners who are keen to stay in business at the expense of independence and good journalism.

Smart media owners know that good journalism leads to good business and that they do not have to worry about staying in business if they do enough to stay in journalism.

The attacks by government agents and agencies, however, are not just attacks on media freedom. They are part of a wider attack on the judiciary, on NGOs, on political opponents and rivals, on churches and religious leaders, and on minority groups.

They are an attack on the values of freedom, accountability and civil participation that are key to the growth of democracy and future stability of the country.

So the next time there is a protest match outside and the media are showing Mexican soaps and writing about music concerts instead, be very afraid, for that censorship, whether by self or by other agents, is not just an attack on media freedom – it is an attack on us all and on the collective values that make us citizens of this country.

dkalinaki@ug.nationmedia.com