Bethia Pearson, forfatter ved State of Digital Publishing

Media capture happens when media outlets lose their independence and fall under the influence of political or financial interests. This often leads to news content that favours power instead of public accountability. Media Capture in Africa and Latin America: Power and Resistance is a new book edited by news media scholars Hayes Mawindi Mabweazara and Bethia Pearson. It explores how this dynamic plays out in the global south and how journalists and citizens are resisting it. We asked them four questions. What is media capture and how has it reshaped itself in recent times? Media capture describes how media outlets are influenced, manipulated or controlled by powerful actors – often governments or large corporations – to serve their interests. It’s an idea that helps us understand how powerful groups in society can have a negative influence on news media. While this idea isn’t new, what has changed is how subtly and pervasively it now operates. These groups include big technology organisations that own digital media platforms – such as X, owned by xAI (Elon Musk), and Instagram and Facebook, owned by Meta. But it’s also important to consider Google as a large search engine that shapes the news content and audience of many other platforms. Palgrave Macmillan This matters because the media are important for the functioning of democratic societies. Ideally, they provide information, represent different groups and issues in society, and hold powerful actors to account. For example, one of the key roles of the media is to provide accurate information for citizens to be able to decide how to vote in elections. Or to decide what they think about important issues. One big concern, then, is the effect of inaccurate or biased information on democracy. Or it might be that accurate information is harder to access because algorithms and platforms make it easier to access inaccurate or biased information. These can be intended and unintended consequences of the technology itself, but algorithms can amplify misinformation and fake news – especially if this content has the potential to go viral. So, what’s particular about media capture in the global south? This is a really interesting question that is still being investigated, but we have some ideas. First of all, it’s useful to know that media capture scholarship from the global north emerged around the time of the 2008 financial crisis. The influence of financial institutions on business journalists was one of the first areas of study. Since then, research in the US has focused on the capture of government-funded media organisations like Voice of America. And on how digital platforms like Google and Facebook can lead to capture. In the global south, scholars have drawn attention to the importance of large media corporations in understanding media capture. For example, in Latin America, there’s a high level of what’s called “media concentration”. This is when many media outlets are owned by a few companies. These companies often own companies in other sectors, which means that critical reporting on business interests presents a conflict of interest. But to focus on Africa, scholars have drawn attention to governments as a source of pressure on journalists and editors. This can be through direct pressure or what we might call “covert” pressure. Withholding advertising that helps to fund media outlets is an example, or offering financial incentives to stop investigating certain topics. Researchers are also concerned about the influence of big tech in Africa. Digital platforms like Google and Facebook can shape the news and information that citizens have access to. Can you share some of the studies from the book? Our book includes many interesting studies – from Colombia, Brazil and Mexico in Latin America to Ethiopia and Morocco in Africa. We’ll share a few African cases here to give an overview of the issues. The book’s contribution on Ghana warns us that although more overt “old” types of media capture may have subsided, transitional democracies can feature messier, more nuanced forms of media control. This can be evident in government pressures and through capture of regulators. In the Morocco chapter, we see the threat to media freedom presented by digital platforms owned by global tech giants. This is known as “infrastructural capture”. It means news organisations become dependent on tech giants to set the rules of the game for democratic communication. Another compelling case is Nigeria, where researchers explore ties between media ownership and political patronage. The authors argue that the Nigerian press is failing in its democratic duty because of its reliance on advertising and sponsorship income from the state. Added to this are ineffective regulatory mechanisms and close relationships with some big businesses that own newspapers and printing presses. How can media capture be resisted in the global south? The studies in the book show some ways forward and we do think it’s important to be optimistic! Resistance takes many forms. Sometimes it comes through legal and policy reform aimed at increasing transparency and media diversity. In other cases, it’s driven by social movements, investigative journalists and independent media who continue to operate under pressure. The chapter on Uganda shows that journalist groups working with media advocacy organisations can strategically act to resist government media capture and harmful regulations. For example, to push back against one legislative change, several groups formed a temporary network called Article 29 (named after the article in the Ugandan constitution protecting free speech) and the African Centre for Media Excellence produced a report criticising the proposed changes. One of the chapters on Ghana also shows how networks such as journalists, media associations, human rights groups and legal organisations can mobilise to push back against government influence. Organisations including the Ghana Journalists Association and Ghana Independent Broadcasters Association have played key roles in, for example, taking the media regulator to court to overturn laws that would have led to censorship. These findings are echoed in Latin America, where research on Mexico and Colombia also found professional journalism to be a strong source of resistance. The conversation must also include rethinking how we define capture itself. If we frame it only as total control, we risk missing the everyday ways influence operates – and the spaces where it can be resisted. We would also say it’s really important that citizens are aware and alert to the issues when they think about how they access news media and what platforms they use. This is sometimes called “media literacy” and is about people being more knowledgeable about where trustworthy news comes from. Hayes Mabweazara, Senior Lecturer in Sociological & Cultural Studies (Media, Culture & Society), University of GlasgowBethia Pearson, Research Associate, ERC Global Remunicipalisation, University of GlasgowThis article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

SODP

SODP-medier

Bethia Pearson

Afrikanske medier trues av myndigheter og Big Tech – Bok følger de siste trendene

Om

Nyttige lenker

Utvalgte artikler