Journalism in Namibia has become an expanding and self-righteous space

Namibia’s Media Landscape Is Stuck In The Stone Age

By: Alfredo Tjiurimo Hengari

WEAK and bad journalism has the potential to undermine democratic debate and development.

To have weak and unqualified journalists is as good or as bad as having incompetent and unqualified leaders. Both are toxic and retard progress.
While bad politicians may still have in theory power with responsibility because they have to provide tangible outcomes and account during elections, journalists are not exposed to that fate. As a result of this lack of discernible accountability, journalism in Namibia has become an expanding and self-righteous space, with each entity functioning in its own traditional journalistic silo.
What is more problematic is that this expansion has not been accompanied by the deepening of quality journalism. This is not surprising because Namibia does not have a critical mass of highly educated and well-trained journalists. Journalism is somewhat clerical and looks more like an outlet for anyone who can carry a pen and a folio, speak and write a bit of English. Without exigent demands and rigorous judgment, some of the stories and columns that we now read in various papers look more like graffiti with punctuation. In light of this calamitous state of the media, four observations deserve to be made.
First, the absence of professional skills, both as a result of a lack of relevant education and training in this sector, suggest that the nature of journalism in Namibia has not been sufficiently dynamic and up to date with regional and global trends. Bar a few exceptions and innovations, our media landscape has remained excessively rudimentary. Those with access to international media, including broadcast channels such as Al-Jazeera, CNN, BBC, France 24 or newspapers such as the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, Le Monde or South Africa’s Business Day, cannot but bemoan the provincialism in which the Namibia’s media landscape finds itself. What one observes in international media is the important transformation of how news is delivered to an increasingly demanding heterogenous audience. Namibian media has not bought into this transformation, which essentially entails asking what to do with information, including how to process information for audiences, thereby informing judgment and choice. For well over a decade, newspapers and broadcasters have moved away from merely providing information to readers and listeners.
Second, due to the globalisation of information, ‘citizen’ journalists, bloggers and columnists have become commonplace and have opinions – even on things they know nothing about. The availability of information has made this possible. If you want to be informed, you will be more or less informed. The battle then, is not about information, but the quality of investigations, the depth with which information is commented on and delivered to audiences. Looking at things this way explains why I was pretty appalled by the sameness of newspaper reports on Swapo’s last Central Committee meeting - no research and depth, no searing political analysis and philosophical questioning which ordinarily would accompany a story of that nature for the New York Times or Le Monde. Among others, it was also appalling to see the 50th anniversary of the death of Frantz Fanon to pass without any special supplements or commentary. Yet, banal birthdays of the president and prime minister enjoy special treatment for purely commercial reasons. There seem to be no fine equilibrium between the commercial and intellectual pursuits, which define the vitality of world-class media.
Third, my gut tells me that Namibians are willing to learn. Newspapers and broadcasters must be at the cutting edge of that process. Namibians want to see and read more about pressing issues with robust policy and news analysis around these. They want the strengths and weaknesses of the undeclared candidacies of Jerry Ekandjo or Pendukeni Ithana for Swapo’s presidential nomination to be well-researched and analysed in headline stories. They want to know more about the men and women behind the subterranean political campaigns in Swapo. In short, Namibians need the type of journalism that is probing, audacious and sets the political and economic agenda, and does not simply follow the agenda as set by politicians or business-leaders. Newspapers must be able to construct and comment on issues competently in their own right. Politicians should in return act on these. Certainly, to deliver news and information in a policy-oriented manner would demand well-remunerated, well-skilled and specialists journalists with global perspectives.
In other parts of the globe, journalists are intellectual and policy-gurus in their own right, capable of holding substantive debates with academics and politicians. Alas, our journalism is not in that space. To move in this direction demands that newspapers and media in general get out of traditional sectarian spaces. In Paris, New York or Johannesburg, regular public panel discussions through partnerships with universities and think tanks are the second skin of newspapers and broadcasters. It is just plain intellectual laziness to have a nation whose main reflex for discussion and feedback is the immediacy of a 160 character SMS in newspapers. To take society upwards, journalists, newspapers and broadcasters should be deeply intellectual and philosophical forces in their own right.
What I seek to suggest here is that the media must foster a Socratic ethic of discussion by taking issues beyond print and broadcast into university halls, cafés and community halls for deeper analysis and questioning. They must occupy the terrain of ideas fully. Le Monde, the leading, but financially stressed French newspaper, has through Les débats du Monde programmed panel discussions in cafes and theatres on a range of pressing issues. It has, like many other leading papers of the world, established platforms for public debates. Refined newspapers also participate and measure public opinion through polls and special thematic publications.
Fourth, to do the things that I have just mentioned would require deep introspection and an auto-critique on the part of media owners, editors and journalists. Some of the best schools of journalism, such as Rhodes University or Stellenbosch University are in neighbouring South Africa. But then, how many journalists came out of these universities during the past decade? Quality journalists, with good degrees as a solid foundation for further professional training, would demand important investments. These investments, essential for a brighter future for journalism in Namibia, have not yet been made. That explains why we find ourselves in this pious situation. I, and perhaps others may want to see our cabinet to look like that of Singapore, with good doctorates and master degrees from elite institutions. Similarly, our editors and journalists as an important estate in our democracy should also be inhabited by men and women who have studied at some of the world’s finer institutions.
What can be said, by way of conclusion, is that the driving force behind the transformation and refinement of journalism lies in thinking beyond excessive commercial logic, and more in education, skilling and innovation. This may even change the rudimentary perception that politicians and newspapers owners have of journalists. At present, our journalism is still crude. It ought to move beyond the stone-age stage.

* Alfredo Tjiurimo Hengari is a PhD-fellow in political science and researcher at the Centre for Political Research at the University of Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne, France. He is currently a guest lecturer in European Studies at Rouen Business School, France.