BY BALCHA HURESSA
On Sunday the 21st of 2009, I went
to National Theater along with my daughters to see a recently introduced
theater. We had an ample spare time when we arrived there and decided to stay
at Ras Hotel. In the hotel, there were many people. There were also two couples
in the center. We took chairs and sat by them. Although there were many people
in the hotel, the couples paid little attention to them. They were loudly
chatting and laughing.
In the meantime, one of the ladies loudly
said, “BBC”. I turned my face to her and read some discontent in her facial
expression. Being confused why she called him “BBC”, I let my ears expecting that
they might continue their talks. It was really unbelievable that her friend has
become nervous for being called “BBC”. His face turned cold and kept quite. The
other couples advised both of them to cool down. Despite my curiosity to know
the reasons, they went out of the hotel. Having that “BBC” ringing in my mind, I
heard another young man saying, “Don’t be BBC?” to the man by him in the
theater hall. I have tried my best to interpret it but I couldn’t.
It was in the next black Monday morning that
I heard the same word in my work place. A friend of mine called our colleague
“BBC”. That time it was easy for me to ask about that. “What do you mean by
“BBC”?” I asked. He laughed at me and asked,”Don’t you know what “BBC” means?
“I couldn’t comprehend it in the context you used,” I replied. “Good BBC in this sense means an imposter or
liar”. I was ashamed of my ignorance and failure to relate things with current
issues. Many people in Ethiopia have considered the BBC as an irresponsible
media for its campaign against the positive image of their country.
It is obvious that many scholars argue that
media should play its role meaningfully in supporting development efforts. According to Jain et al (1999), media should
play a leading role in the fight against poverty, unemployment, health,
literacy and population explosion.
However, what we have been experiencing is
the other side of the coin. Despite the efforts and strives made by developing
nations to alleviate poverty and ensure sustainable economic development, the
international media have been aggravating conflicts. They neither have played
their roles nor respected the media ethics in covering reports. Alexander et al
(1999:94) said, “Media ethics concerns the delicate balance between society’s
interest and the interest of individuals, groups and institutions such as the
press and the government.”
Of course, this doesn’t mean all media
violate media ethics. There are some media contributing their roles in alleviating poverty. However, a few of them forgot their
roles in the society and violate media ethics for one or other reasons.
One typical example could be the British
Broadcast Cooperation (BBC). Its editorial values are truth and accuracy,
impartiality, editorial integrity, independence, serving the public interest
and accountability.
But what is the BBC really doing? Does it care for the accuracy and balance of
its stories? Is it impartial? Does it keep the interests of the public? Of
course, the BBC may say “yes”, but as for its audiences are concerned, the
other side of the coin might be true. Its editorial values remained only in
black and white.
There are webs of fabrications by the BBC concerning
Ethiopia. Recently, as an extension of
its campaign against development in Ethiopia, it criticized the status of aid
allotment some 25 years back, in which the BBC faced unexpected challenges from
the donor community and the celebrated vocalist Bob Geldof. The confrontation
hasn’t solved yet. The confrontation was caused due to the recent white lie
made by the BBC. But BBC’s legendary stories continued as they aimed at
jeopardizing the efforts of the country in ensuring sustainable economic
development and enhancing the thriving of democracy. It swiftly shifted to Gilgel Gibe III
hydropower development project.
In the past three month’s time, the BBC reported various fabricated
stories. The land policy of the country, the aid distribution status of some 25
years ago, the Gibe hydroelectric dam, the political space in Ethiopia,
the food shortage and others. We, Ethiopians, appreciate the attention given to
our country in the giant BBC. But we are annoyed of the reports covered so far
as they were reported in a distorted manner.
The festering question is why does the BBC shift from one fabrication to
another? Why is it necessary for the giant BBC to move against the interests of
poor nations like Ethiopia? The answer might be as plain as the nose on
everyone’s face. Destabilize the poor nations and jeopardizing their
development efforts, though not in black and white, is the editorial policy of
the BBC.
Its recent propaganda focuses on Web campaign against Ethiopia’s Gibe III
dam and putting pressure on donors to decline funding
the project, which may need 1.4 billion USD. The campaign of the BBC against
this huge hydropower development project, according to what most Ethiopians
believe, is the extension of its previous destructive reports.
Of course, any media has its own policy. So
did the BBC. Its agenda setting is obviously based on its editorial policy.
Many analysts argue that despite its unavailability in black and whites, BBC’s
editorial policy towards Africa in general and Ethiopia in particular is
unhealthy and non ethical.
However, this has remained so vague for
centuries. Previously, as there were various problems, Ethiopians had been
innocently taking BBC’s reports with their exaggerations. Today, Ethiopia is at
a very different position. Its people have been enjoying their human and
political rights. They have ample access to international and local media. They
also read well the global situations. Equality among nations/nationalities and
peoples of Ethiopia has begun to thrive. Although at a smaller scale, the
people have been becoming beneficiaries of the developments in their country.
The journey towards making all Ethiopians beneficiary of sustainable
development is in its right truck.
However, the BBC and other giant media have
reported none of these developments. Don’t positive and success stories make
human interests? Is it only the negatives, the fabrications, the campaign
against democracy and development that make human interest?
It might be too vague to comprehend for
someone who considered the BBC as a giant credible media. The reality, however,
witnessed not. It is rather a biased, incredible and destructive media in the
world. No time, no
single development or affirmative story about Africa in general and Ethiopia in
particular has reported by the BBC since time immemorial. It usually sets its
agenda on conflicts, diseases, famine and the like with exaggerations at the
largest possible extent.
On one hand, the BBC never reports any of the
democracy and development improvements even though they too make news of human
interests. On the other hand, it has been making distortions of any single
issue it reported. Had the BBC reported the problems rightly as what they are,
no one could have complained about it. Besides, it usually uses incredible
sources and gives wrong analysis. If we take the aforementioned reports of the
BBC about Ethiopia, they were presented in a status others would like to be,
not in a status they really looked like.
The writer of this article has made a mini-survey
on the impact of international media on Ethiopian’s development and democratic
efforts. In that mini-survey, the international media: VOA, BBC, DW, Xinhua,
Reuters and Al-Jazeera and others were taken into consideration. Reports by the
media monitored from March 01 – August 30, 2008 were taken and thoroughly
evaluated and sorted according to their impacts: negative or affirmative within the major content divisions:
politics, economy and social. Having put the overall findings of the mini-survey aside, it would
be so paramount importance to bring the status of the BBC reporting in to view.
The BBC covered various stories about
Ethiopia in the aforementioned time frame. Sixty-nine stories were monitored
and thoroughly evaluated. Of these, the
lion share 46 (66.67%) of the stories had devastating consequence. Out of these negative stories, about
33(71.74%) of them were politics.
Although the BBC put “harm and offence
minimization” as one of its editorial values, most of the aforementioned
stories were presented with strong tones of maximizing offences that violates its
own values. If that is the editorial value of the BBC, what’s special to
Ethiopia that all the reports had aggressive and destabilizing tones?
The coverage of unfounded negative stories
about Ethiopia by the BBC has been increasing from time to time, reaching its
worst peak nowadays at the time when Ethiopia has exerting its full efforts to
alleviate poverty and ensure sustainable economic development.
In a nut shall, the BBC has been jeopardizing
the development efforts of the country. It has not only little contribution to
support the poverty reduction programs but also striving against its reality.
Its role in harm minimization remained insignificant. Presenting the negative stories, most of them
fabricated, in a very high tone aggravates conflict. It failed to promote the
thriving of democracy and good governance.
Most of its reports about Ethiopia substantiate this fact. It has become
an instrument for groups who have campaigning against development in the
country. Destabilizing and jeopardizing development and democracy in poor
nations has become part and parcel of the BBC’s Editorial Policy without making
a mountain out of molehills.