BROADCASTING POLICY AND PRACTICE IN AFRICA ARTICLE 19 GLOBAL CAMPAIGN FOR FREE EXPRESSION BROADCASTING POLICY AND PRACTICE IN AFRICA First published 2003 by ARTICLE 19. © ARTICLE 19 ISBN 1-902598-50-4 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be photocopied, recorded or otherwise reproduces, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form by electronic or technical means without prior permission of the copyright owner and publisher. CONTENTS Acknowledgements iii Notes on Authors v INTRODUCTION 1 Chapter 1: EQUITABLE FREQUENCY ALLOCATION 7 Chapter 2: REGULATORY MODELS FOR BROADCASTING IN AFRICA 34 Chapter 3: AFRICAN REGULATION OF SATELLITE BROADCASTING IN THE ERA OF CONVERGENT ICTS 71 Chapter 4: MEDIA PLURALISM AND DIVERSITY: A Critical Reveiw of Competing Models 114 Chapter 5: VIABILITY AND SUSTAINABILITY OF PUBLIC SERVICE BROADCASTING 138 Chapter 6: ISSUES IN LOCAL CONTENT OF BROADCAST MEDIA 162 Annex 1: ACCESS TO THE AIRWAVES Principles on Freedom of Expression and Broadcast Regulation 181 Annex 2: AFRICAN CHARTER ON BROADCASTING 200 Annex 3: AFRICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES’ RIGHTS Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression in Africa 205 REFERENCES 214 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS e are deeply indebted to the authors of the publication, who are Windividually acknowledged in the Notes on authors. We thank the many individuals and organisations, too numerous to mention, who provided valuable advice and information for this publication. This publication was edited by Tawana Kupe who also supervised the individual authors and produced and copy edited by John Barker Director of ARTICLE 19 Africa Programme. Wallace Chuma a PhD student in Media Studies at the University of the Witwatersrand provided editorial assistance towards the end of the project. RTICLE 19 gratefully acknowledges the support of the Swedish AInternational Development Agency (SIDA) for this publication. iii NOTES ON AUTHORS Katrin Nyman-Metcalf (PhD) is associate professor at Riga Graduate School of Law, Latvia, visiting professor at Universities in Estonia and Sweden as well as international advisory to the Communications Regulatory Authority in Bosnia-Herzegovina and active as a consultant on e.g. telecommunications law. Jill Hills (PhD) is Professor of Telecommunications and Broadcasting Policy, School of Communication, Design and Media at Westminster University, United Kingdom. Russel Honeyman is the editor of Africa Film & TV journal and yearbook since 1993. Adolf Mbaine is Lecturer at the Department of Mass Communication, Makerere University, Uganda. Francis B. Nyamnjoh (PhD) is Associate Professor, Department of Sociology University of Botswana, Botswana. Nixon Kariithi is Pearson Chair Economics Journalism, Department of Journalism and Media Studies, Rhodes University, South Africa. Tawana Kupe (PhD) is Senior Lecturer in Media Studies, School of Literature and Language Studies, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa. v INTRODUCTION Background and Context roadcasting is very important in Africa because a majority of Africans Bget their information, education and entertainment from primarily radio and then television. The press tends to have an urban bias and is dependent on literacy. Radio uses more African languages than television and is therefore more accessible. However, the influence and role of television has grown among urban dwellers in Africa. Television has low penetration because of the high costs of sets, lack of electricity and weak coverage. In the overwhelming majority of African countries, broadcasting has been the most controlled medium for both technical and political reasons. The technological limits to the frequency spectrum and its allocation at both the international and national level have meant that unlike the press, not just anyone can broadcast. Broadcasting’s ability to reach the majority of citizens in a country has obvious political implications. Colonial administrations, which introduced broadcasting to Africa, controlled it and used it for largely political propaganda purposes. Post colonial African governments also followed a policy of control of broadcasting mainly for political reasons. Between 1960s and 1980s when coups were West and Central Africa’s most favoured mode of change of government, broadcasting stations were often the first institutions to be taken over by coup plotters. In the recent democratization processes of the 1990s privately owned FM radio stations, where they have been allowed, have been cited as an important factor in giving the opposition a platform during elections and in ensuring that elections are conducted freely and fairly. In Uganda, Mali and Ghana talk shows and discussions have been influential in providing a forum for robust political debates. Equally control of broadcasting has been cited as an impediment to democratization or pluralist politics. It has also been noted that FM radio stations have tended to be dominated by popular western music rather than local music or programmes in local languages. In most if not all countries in Africa broadcasting has since independence been a monopoly of the state justified on the grounds that it 1 Broadcasting Policy and Practice in Africa was a public service critical to development, the fostering of unity and the promotion of national culture and identity. To achieve these policy goals, broadcasting was often located in Ministries of Information or Broadcasting and the state broadcaster was answerable and accountable to the Minister and the State President. This arrangement allowed the Minister and State President a direct say in appointments to boards, management issues and programming content in the ‘national interest’. The national interest was often defined as or meant the political and policy choices of the ruling party. Rarely was there a reference to the ‘public interest’ which was more pluralist and inclusive. More often than not, these institutional arrangements violated the editorial and programming independence of the public broadcasters and turned them into state broadcasters. It could said then that broadcasting policy and regulation used to be ‘simple’. Simple in the sense that it seemed self evident that like other public services, broadcasting should be run by the state. In the immediate post independence period, it seemed also that the tasks of nation building and development were clear priorities and governments which had lead the independence struggle the undisputed leaders. Simple also in the sense that in many countries, private broadcasting was not permitted and the only broadcasting entity to regulate was the ‘public’ broadcaster operating under the ambit of the government. Liberalization of the Airwaves The 1990s witnessed the beginnings of changes in broadcasting in Africa that have been described as ‘liberalization of the airwaves’. Liberalization of the airwaves is a reference to a process that has led to the emergence of private broadcasters and to a much lesser extent and in a very few countries, ‘community’ broadcasters. It has also included the emergence and growth of satellite and subscription or pay services. By 2002, direct to home satellite TV had reached 41 countries in Africa. The liberalization of broadcasting, is happening in a context of political change from military and one party state governments of the period after independence to multi party governments. These political changes have been called democratization and are a result of broader political changes at the international level in which the former socialist and communist governments in East and Central Europe and the former 2 Introduction Soviet Union collapsed and western liberal democracy gained ascendance. The relevance of these changes to broadcasting is that pluralist politics is now linked to the existence of pluralist and diverse media systems as opposed to government and state monopolies. Freedoms of expression and the media especially with regards to editorial and programming independence have become central issues linked to the provision of alternative sources of information. New buzzwords of deregulation, commercialization and privatization of broadcasting and telecommunications became popular and in some people’s minds immediate policy choices that would create a new broadcasting landscape. Demands for democratic reforms include demands that state broadcasters be transformed into public service broadcasters that enjoy editorial and programming independence, as well as the licensing of private broadcasters to exist in their own right and as alternatives and competitors to the public broadcasters. Technologically, the 1990s also witnessed the rapid development of satellite broadcasting and the convergence between broadcasting and telecommunications, which meant the presence in national broadcasting systems of foreign broadcasters not necessarily subject to local regulation. The rapid development of digital technologies also meant the promise of more channel availability, which could in technical terms mean an end to the problem of limited spectrum availability. It is important to note that the advocates of liberalization of the airwaves have not often thought through the full implications of liberalizing the airwaves. Many if not most thought that the entry of private broadcasters was sufficient and would result in competition, editorial and programming independence and choices for audiences. In short, private ownership is equated to editorial and programming independence. Pluralism of stations equated