The Times reported last year in August that theglobal media mogul Rupert Murdochhad telephoned journalists Parker-Pope, Kate Kelly and Henry Sender who hadditched one of his newspapers, The Wall Street Journal “begging” them to stayafter announcing that they were leaving the newspaper
That didnot come as a surprise to me considering the fact that a section of media had accusedMr Murdoch of “gutter journalism and for notoriously interfering with editorialdecisions of his media outlets.” Nevertheless, what struck me the most was thatthe trend of media owners telling journalists working for their outlets what towrite and possibly how to write was not only in Africa.
When Itoured Bloomberg financial news services last week, I was surprised to learnthat its owner, Michael Bloomberg has been at the Bloomberg Tower, theheadquarter of the network, about two times since 2005 when the building wasinaugurated.
Consideringthe fact that Mr Bloomberg is trying to “lobby for support” to seek a thirdterm in office as mayor, I thought he would try to use his media in support ofhim.
If he isnot doing that, then it’s contrary to what I have been reading that a “smallnumber of very rich people vet the news in order to secure and augment theirwealth and power” here.
However,it’s a challenge for US and Western media in general to remain eliteestablishments as they vaunt to be especially when it comes to covering Africa.
There is a lot to report from Africa beyond picturesof starving children and displaced families. This however doesn’t mean that allhave only been reporting disasters alone; I must admit that some media outletshave done a good job in terms of showing that there can be prosperity on thecontinent. Reuters and BBC are good examples.
When electionsare held democratically and peaceful as it is the case now in Zambia, nobodythinks that is a good story to tell but news that President Muluzi is trying tochange the Malawian constitution to allow him to stand for a third term.
Is therefairness if Mayor Bloomberg did the same and still be seen as a person “whowants to help New Yorkers cope with the financial crisis” while Muluzi andcomrade Mugabe would be seen as dictators in the eyes of Western media?
