By Kemo Cham
The more, they say, the merrier.
In Sierra Leone this saying seems to go for pretty much everything – civil society and rights activism, politics, entertainment, and especially the media.
The dawning of democracy saw the proliferation of these “democratic” institutions. But, like in almost all the above domains, development within the media has been a constant source of apprehension. Yet many people tend to view multiplicity of newspapers, radio stations and other mass media entities as indicative of the existence of freedom of expression.
While this could be true to some extent, there is so much misgiving regarding the watchdog role?
The recent unanimous indictment of the media by the European Union election observers for its “biased” coverage of the recent elections is fresh in mind.
But it gets worse than mere biased political reportage.
“The media has failed to address core issues and instead engages on trivial matters that boil down to personality attacks,” says Battiloi Warritay, Consultant Director, Monitoring, Research and Projects Unit, Independent Media Commission (IMC).
“The average journalist in Sierra Leone is lazy. They do no reading, and as a result their intellectual capacity is weak. I do not know why people buy their papers,” he adds.
Triviality evidently dominated the November 17 elections coverage, so much that pertinent issues like voter education were grossly overlooked. That could have accounted for the alarmingly high void votes of 4.7% recorded.
Monitoring
At IMC's Monitoring and Research Unit office an intern assiduously reads through a newspaper. On the table beside him lays a bunch of over a dozen others.
They say on average 23 publications are screened here daily.
Hardly a week passes without the Commission finding a reason to call to order some recalcitrant editor/publisher.
With funding challenges, the IMC finds it difficult to professionally advice and control “mischievous and errant” media houses.
According to Warritay, some of the infringements reported are done deliberately, rather than for lack of professionalism.
The Media Code of Practice of 2000, amended in 2007, was designed to guard against this. But it clearly has failed to sanitize the situation.
IMC evaluation [2008-2010] found that an overwhelming majority of editors was familiar with the code, yet hardly any demonstration of this is seen in practice.
A revised code has since been readied, and it awaits parliamentary approval. Besides guidance on elections coverage, it provides for more kinds of infringements, with tougher penalties.
Crucially, this revised code places the Commission on a stronger footing in legal terms. It notably imposes a Le 20-million fine for defaulters, as opposed to Le 1 million currently.
“This could leave many newspapers out of operation,” notes Warritay.
Edging newspapers out of business is not the goal, but such hefty fines almost certainly guarantees compliance, he stresses.
At this point though the document merely serves as training manual.
Restriction
According to the IMC study, between 2007 and 2009 the print media expanded from 12 to 33. By end 2009 only 31% of that was still in operation [There are now 67 registered publications].
Add those on the waiting list for licensing and those that have been ‘dying off and resurrecting’, and you will get about 90.
It is hard to give accurate figures because most publishers do not renew their registrations.
The Commission says it has no intention of restricting registration as it goes against the constitutional provision encouraging a pluralistic media.
Prospective publishers are required only to produce details about their editors and teams in writing. No verification of the information is carried.
In many cases, it turns out, these papers have ‘quiet bankrollers’ with political or corporate interest, so that they easily dictate their editorial policies.
Such publications are simply driven by the individual desires of their owners, who only see endless moneymaking opportunities rather than the watchdog role.
In some cases media houses comprise only about two people, with a computer in a small enclosure as an office. One person handles adverts and the other, ‘news’.
Some have no known offices at all.
In extreme cases the publisher is the editor, cashier, auditor, and everything. Such papers are extremely susceptible to manipulation, even when they are not owned by ‘quiet bankrollers’. They go along with the tide of business, publishing only when there are adverts.
Other publications come out only when their ‘quiet bankrollers’ need their services, such as election periods.
This was evident in the run up to November 17.
“In the next two months, some will disappear into thin air, and the best they can do is coming once a week to grab the week end adverts,” observes Patrick Lewis, PRO, IMC.
Pen diplomats
The political and corporate influence over the media makes a conducive operating environment a distant dream.
The effect is division in the field as journalists are used against journalists.
Community aggrieved over the exploitative activities of mining companies are left at the mercy of God.
The divide [among journalists] is all about access to state resources, and control of power, says Mass Communications lecturer, Tonya Musa.
And this simply means the editorials are influenced either by power structure or economic structure, he adds.
Journalists who identify with the government are rewarded with appointment as ‘Press Attaches’ at diplomatic missions abroad.
These ‘Pen Diplomats’ are supposed to report on activities of these missions. But they rather have their eyes at home, engaging in every petty domestic political debate.
Since some newspapers were operated from ‘living rooms’, when the owners deploy abroad, they practically leave with everything.
I know of at least two newspapers which suffered this fate.
Other journalists have become cabinet ministers. Some, with the use of their pens, easily got party primaries committees` endorsement to contest parliamentary or local council elections.
“Political economy is muzzling that freedom journalism is enjoying in Sierra Leone,” notes Mr Musa.
“There is enough indication to show that there is no enthusiasm to approve the new media code of practice… and that to me is a clear indication of a lack of political will on the part of the government, and it is also a reflection of the failure to pass the Freedom of Information law,” adds Warritay.
Reckless publication
This government often prides itself of never having jailed or harassed any journalist, which it says is indicative of its tolerance to the media.
Notwithstanding the contention in that, there is undoubtedly a conducive atmosphere for media practitioners in the country.
But also this is just up to an extent, beyond which journalists hardly feel secured. The 1965 Public Order Act remains a major impediment.
On the pretext of protecting national security, that colonial law effectively limits free expression.
As one analyst puts it, it serves as a check so that government doesn’t have to soil its image.
No wonder repeated promises of expunging it have gone unrealised.
The government, argues Tonya Musa, operates in a democratic scenario only through regular free and fair elections.
“Whenever they argue about democracy, their major telling is periodical free and fair elections, not so much about free opinion and free expressions.”
Consequently, the media`s democratic role in championing accountability and rule of law is seriously compromised in Sierra Leone.
But even though he resents the blatant undermining effort by politicians of the IMC`s values, the Mass Communication lecturer sounds unsure about the implication of repealing the Public Order Act.
“…with this type of reckless publications, what will be state security” he queries.
Radio & TV
Although most of the indictment is directed at the print section, some segment of the radio and TV share part of the recriminations.
The IMC evaluation of the media identified a common mode of programming unchanged for a very long period with the Sierra Leone Broadcasting Corporation (SLBC) and most radio stations.
This, critics say, adds no value to public information.
Instead of broadcasting programs on issues that could be more beneficial to society, their programs are dominated by phone-in and religious programs, news, and announcement, and “get-rich-quick-money-making activities” funded by mobile operators, chides Warritay.
There are 10 registered TV stations in Sierra Leone, but only four are functional, including the recently inaugurated Nigerian owned AIT, and two religious based channels.
SLBC, the main focus of the recent criticism over “biased” elections coverage, may have a lot of work to do to regain public trust as a public broadcaster, that is, if it ever had any.
The proliferation of radio stations [64 so far] also serves as a sign of the promotion of free expression.
But they too have challenges.
A number of them have been brought in front of the IMC because of programs that local officials found wanting.
Tonya Musa says some of these are simply programs critical about the operations of the council authorities.
“So to what extent are they free is the question, when in fact local councils may see them as part of their council infrastructure,” he notes.
A few radio stations have however enjoyed preference in spite of the controversy they attract in other quarters.
Examples are stations that air the popular Monologue program.
Criticised for its tendency of promoting hate speech, Monologue appears to enjoy accolade even within the high and mighty in government. 2013 presents a new challenge for the Sierra Leone media as it goads the new government supposedly in the interest of the people.
