Alternative journalism or trouble makers; An analysis of Ugandan Diaspora online media.

Kennedy Javuru PhD

Alternative journalism or trouble makers; An analysis of Ugandan Diaspora online

media.

Introduction

This chapter investigates the emergence of the Ugandan diaspora online media and their

influence on the overall news media and democracy in Uganda. There has been a rise in the

presence of diaspora voice both in the informal and formal media settings. Consequently, this

has raised scholarly interest in the field of diaspora and new media (Alonso and Olarzabal,

2010).

The chapter focuses on the Ugandan digital diaspora with particular attention to some of the

popular websites and blogs which concentrate on Ugandan news and debates. The theoretical

framework to be used acknowledges a tension between the traditional journalism paradigm

with its emphasis on media workers as professionals and an alternative paradigm

foregrounding citizen participation and breakdown of old media hierarchies largely

influenced by the impact of new media technology. I assess how the websites and blogs

written by Ugandans in the diaspora relate to recognized journalistic professional practices

and also theorise the ways transnationalism and new media are interrelated with the rise of

new forms of community, public spheres and sites of cultural production.

The Ugandan Diaspora

At least 10 per cent of the Ugandan population of 30 million live and work abroad (Uganda

Diaspora News, 2012) and that is about 1.5 million according to the UN Human

Development Report of 2009 estimates (MOFA, 2012). Many of these Ugandans possess

impressive educational and professional qualifications and contribute significantly to the

development of their host countries in diverse fields including medicine, business, science,

technology and education. It is important to note that this figure excludes a large number of

Ugandans who fall outside the category of ‘permanent legal resident.’ For instance, it

excludes thousands of undocumented people who are in the northern hemisphere because

they overstayed their student, tourist or professional exchange visas, people who came to the

west illegally, and students who are studying in various colleges and universities in the west

and who are unlikely to return to the homeland in the immediate future upon completion of

their studies.

In Uganda, like many other countries, emigration of nationals has been on the increase and

can be attributed to a variety of factors both voluntary and involuntary. Some of the

involuntary factors include wars and conflicts while on the other hand some of the voluntary

factors include employment, trade, studies, tourism and marriage among others. It cannot be

pointed out that one particular factor is the main cause of emigration of Ugandans to other

countries but rather a combination of factors and this cuts across all sectors of society as

opposed to a single age group, tribe or level of education. The post-independence period

between 1968 and 1985 witnessed massive emigration of Ugandans due to political instability

and civil war that affected the country. The civil strife was as a result of the flawed system of

governance left behind by the colonialists that empowered some tribal groups at the expense

of others. In addition, there were weak and undeveloped state structures of governance. The

military was the dominant institution that controlled state power and was soon used by

opportunistic leaders to abuse human rights and oppress those opposed to their rule. Hence

more Ugandans fled to live in exile to guarantee their safety. The majority of the Ugandan

diaspora community in Europe and North America migrated during the turbulent 1970s and

80s.

Following Gabriel Scheffer’s (1986, p.3) definition of diaspora: ‘modern diasporas are ethnic

minority groups of migrant origins residing and acting in host countries but maintaining

strong sentimental and material links with their countries of origin’, the Ugandan diaspora is

a diverse people representing several ethnic groups in Uganda and still has strong links and

family ties to their motherland. Even though Uganda is usually polarized along ethnic and

religious fault-lines, the reality of their shared experience of displacement in a strange

cultural habitus has forced them to cultivate and nurture a diaspora romantic nationalism

often lubricated by the instrumentality of tribal associations and lately the World Wide Web;

what Appadurai (1996) would call the ‘paradox of constructed primordialism’. The presence

of these diaspora communities has opened up several opportunities as well as challenges as

they continue to grow in influence both in their destination countries as well as origin in

Uganda. I focus on the Ugandan diaspora community in North America and Europe.

Formerly, migration meant a radical break from place of origin to destination (Faist, 2000).

The lack of rapid forms of communication meant that long-distance migration, in particular,

was disruptive to social ties and former cultural traits. Return visits and continuous contact

were cumbersome at best and often expensive. It is from this situation that terms such as

‘uprooted’, ‘transplanted’ and ‘culture shock’ were developed and ‘assimilation’ was

expected, as separation from the place of origin meant the reconstruction of a new way of life

and the establishment of new social ties. The ‘ethnic village’ and its institutions (e.g. religion)

often served as the gathering point for migrants at the destination where they served as a short

term mechanism of adjustment in the new location, particularly given the disjunctiveness

from the place of origin and the difficulty of retaining ties to it.

More recently, the idea of a transnational community has supplanted the old idea that

migration meant a sharp break from the home community (Castles and Davidson, 2000).

Migrants are now much more likely to continue to retain strong ties to their region of origin,

and complex transnational relationships are developed, with homelands serving as important

symbolic anchors for diasporic peoples (Cohen, 1997; Faist, 2000; Safran, 1991; Van Hear,

1998). Boundaries are now perceived to be more permeable, at the same time that there has

been an erosion of territory as the pre-eminent marker of community (Jacobsen, 2002). The

new markers are more fluid and portable and may have both local and translocal dimensions.

One of the key factors supporting this transformation is the revolution in communication. Not

only is it possible to return home more often for real visits (e.g. via air travel), but it is also

possible to maintain continuous contact with home by virtual visits.

While migration and long-distance communications have long histories (Dahan and Sheffer

2001), new media, especially the Internet, are giving rise to novel communicative spaces and

practices and creating new discursive communities that, while they may as in the case of

Ugandans, build upon existing social networks on the ground, bring them together and extend

their membership and significance in novel ways. As Karim (2003: 16) notes:

‘Transnational ‘third spaces’ neither here nor there are the liminal sites characterized

by a significant degree of creativity. This zone of multiple borders is a frontier of

modernity, where new ways of addressing the problems of contemporary social

relations are sought.’

A number of scholarships have focused in on the impact new media holds on the diaspora

identity formation, cultural expression, politics, and so on. Mitra’s research on Indian

immigrants and their uses of newsgroups (Mitra, 1997) presents dual results: (1) National

identity is imagined simply via the transnational membership in the virtual space, and (2)

National identity is fragmented via the fractured disagreements and ongoing dialogues that

result via a newsgroup that is a temporal and therefore without an end. Additionally, the

original understanding of migration as a strong break from the homeland has been reversed

by the recognition that networked media has enabled migrants to maintain ties to the

originating country; Mitra (1997), Castles and Davidson (2000). Homelands serve as means

of cultural identification for these communities and create an imagined sense of one-ness.

New media, has been a significant mechanism for organising and constructing identities and

community in the modern era (Appadurai, 2001; Georgiou, 2006). Communication at local

and global levels through electronic media such as radio, television and the internet has

played an important role in reminding diasporic people of their sense of belonging and has

helped to form their varied identities (Georgiou, 2006). There have been numerous studies on

electronic media arguing that its nature and capability is important for the diaspora situation,

being more suitable than traditional media forms (Hiller & Franz, 2004; Kang, 2009). Internet

use destabilises the boundary between home and abroad and the power dynamics of majority

and minority (Kang, 2009). New media thus provides people with broad opportunities to

access information through surfing the internet, watching web TV and listening to web radio,

regardless of location or time zone.

The government of Uganda has recently recognised the contributions Ugandans in the

diaspora make to the economic and political development of Uganda. The Diaspora Services

Department (DSD) was established in September 2012 under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

(MOFA). The DSD plays a

‘coordinating role for government in providing a comprehensive range of services to

Ugandans abroad so as to facilitate their contribution to the country’s social,

economic, technological, and political development’

(Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government of Uganda 2012)

The government of Uganda realises that by facilitating international knowledge flows and

technology diffusion, the Ugandan diaspora can act as ‘knowledge brokers’ and promote

innovation in the home country (Agrawal et al., 2008, 2011). The skills of diaspora members

are deemed especially appropriate, thanks to their combination of technical and substantive

expertise with their acquaintance with local conditions (language, institutions, culture, etc.)

Against this background, Ugandans living abroad have in recent times developed closer ties

with home and are taking more interests in the affairs of the country. Apart from contributing

to two-thirds of the total remittance flows to the country (UNCTAD, 2012), Ugandans in the

diaspora are contributing in other spheres of public life in the homeland through the media.

The Ugandan diaspora public sphere has emerged with the advent of the internet. The

Ugandan diaspora use the Internet as a transnational public sphere where they produce and

debate narratives of history, culture, democracy and identity. Through the use of the internet,

they are actively participating in the politics of the homeland by setting up online news

websites, discussion forums and groups for activism. It should be noted that this new

communicative spaces and practices have emerged not in isolation, but rather within the

social and cultural networks on the ground. There is an emergence of a digital diaspora that is

fast gaining a reputation and changing the complexity of the Ugandan media landscape.

Uganda’s Media Landscape

A revolution is sweeping across the media landscape in Uganda. Since 1990, the dominance

of state owned media ownership has been broken with the emergence of privately owned and

independent media entities. Until 1990, Uganda had only one radio station; the state owned

Radio Uganda. Since then, the growth of the private commercial FM radio stations has been

spectacular. According to Uganda Communications Commission, there were 176 licensed

private radio stations in Uganda by 2008 (Lugalambi 2010) and this figure has since risen to

276 according to the Uganda All Media Products Survey (UAMPS) carried out in late 2011

by the research group Ipsos/Synoviate (African Media Barometer [AMB], 2012). However,

the growth of newspapers has not been as prolific most likely because the majority of the

Ugandan rural population cannot afford to buy the newspapers. There are about 15

newspapers both daily and weekly. New Vision is the country’s most popular newspaper, with

64 per cent of readers surveyed, followed by The Daily Monitor (45 per cent) and Bukedde

(44 per cent). The tabloid Red Pepper had a 33 per cent share of readers surveyed. The

newspapers publish some of their stories on their respective websites but they limit the

content available for free or delay posting stories on the web. Having said this, The Daily

Monitor and New Vision now post breaking news on their web sites. However, whereas The

Daily Monitor faithfully publishes breaking news, this is not always the case with the New

Vision, which publishes online news selectively. Television still remains an urban, elite media

and going by the Uganda Media Council’s figures, there are 72 licensed television stations

but not all the stations are in operation. This figure is based on the number of frequencies

licensed. About 80 percent of Ugandans still get their news and related information from

radio (African Media Barometer, 2012). More and more Ugandans are blogging and tweeting

as well. The Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) puts the number of Internet users

in Uganda at 3.5 million; roughly 10 per cent of the population (UCC, 2010). The 2011

UAMPS found that 55 per cent of Ugandans accessing the Internet did so at Internet cafes.

However, the number of people accessing the Internet via mobile phones doubled between

2010 and 2011. Having said this, only 35 per cent of Ugandans have access to mobile phones,

one of the lowest levels of penetration for mobile telephony in Africa (AMB, 2012). Most

people use mobile phones on a daily basis to send or receive information through phone calls,

sms (short message services), while some smart phones can be used to browse the internet;

store, play and share audio, video, images on and off line. Many media houses in Uganda,

especially radio have integrated mobile telephony as a platform for listeners to contribute

news, views, stories and feedback though call in and sms. 75 per cent of Uganda’s Internet

users use the Internet for ‘chatting with friends’, said the UAMPS, with Facebook being the

Internet site most accessed in the country. However, 35 per cent of Internet users access the

Internet for news and current affairs, with the on-line editions of the The Daily Monitor, New

Vision and Red Pepper being the most popular Ugandan sites (AMB, 2012)

The internet is changing the way news is delivered in the Ugandan media. Journalists who

work for established newspapers, radios and television stations now have the opportunity to

become more independent publishers of speciality blogs and hyper local news websites. The

websites can be owned and operated by the media house employing a particular journalist, or

owned and operated independently by the journalist with links to or from the website of the

media organizations where they work. Such websites play an important role in the emerging

news and information landscape by allowing the journalist(s) to go beyond the space, airtime

and gatekeeper limitations of traditional media to publish as much and as often as they wish.

Anyone with an enabled cell phone can access web-based information from anywhere in the

world. A journalist in Uganda can easily publish a personal blog or create quality online news

sites using powerful and easy to use web publishing platforms like Wordpress, Blogger,

Webs, Joomla, Drupal among the many others that provide complete content management

systems. These new media platforms also allow for more interactivity by allowing members

of the public to post comments, articles, information or tips.

Media watchdogs have praised the government for enabling a relatively liberal media

climate. Local journalists have rated media freedom to be at a moderate level. The media

explosion accelerated the government’s interest in control (Mwesigye, 2003). At a glance, the

Ugandan media environment is vibrant with the urban public domain teeming with numerous

media outlets as a result of the liberalisation drives in the early 1990s. However, a closer look

reveals a rather sad picture. Like the famous Luo1 saying, ‘A goat only eats where it is

tethered’, the media in Uganda can only function in as far as the government allows them to.

Most media outfits in Uganda are cautious in giving audience to opinions deemed critical of

the present government especially if such opinion is coming from the diaspora. Government

is often quick to invoke the Anti –Terrorism Act 2002 and the Terrorism Act of 2003 which

makes it a capital offense to support any individual/s or group/s outside the country whose

activities are deemed a threat to national security. However, it is at the government’s

discretion to decide what constitutes a ‘threat’ to national security. In July 2011, a local radio

journalist for Radio Rhino RM in Lira, Northern Uganda, Augustine ‘Rouks’ Okello was

arrested and charged with treason and subversive activities. Okello’s crime was to hold a live

interview on air with the spokesman of People’s Redemption Army (PRA); a rebel group

based in the Democratic Republic of Congo fighting President Museveni’s government. To

date, Okello is incarcerated in Luzira Prison; Uganda’s notorious maximum prison. To

Ugandans living in the northern hemisphere, the news media in Uganda is too cagey to give a

true picture of the lack of democracy and freedom of speech in the country (Alimadi, 2012)2.

Apart from contributing to the news agenda through newspaper articles and radio phone-ins,

the Ugandan diaspora have taken to exploring alternative sources of news through actively

aligning with independent media outlets in Uganda or by becoming media producers

themselves through establishing websites and writing blogs that ‘hit the hammer on the head’

without fears of reprisals from the government (Alimadi, 2012). However, such alternative

news sources raise fundamental questions of authenticity, credibility, objectivity and ethics.

Some of the blog titles like www.musevenimustgo.com suggest outright prejudice against

President of Uganda Yoweri, Kaguta Museveni.

To most Ugandans who have been exiled under the regime of President Museveni, the

internet provides a virtual forum through which their voices can be heard both at home and

around the world. Diaspora media channels are usually inspired by less favourable

conditions in the homeland. Although the above observation often characterize the Ugandan

mainstream media output, caution must be taken not to homogenize the diversity of media

organisations and practices. In a number of cases mainstream media have managed to

produce counter-hegemonic discourses and provided spaces for critical debate, in-depth

analysis and humour.

1 Luo is one of the ethnic groups in Uganda

2 Interview with Mr Milton Alimadi, a Ugandan born Editor in Chief of the New York based Black Star News.

The late 2000s have witnessed momentous developments in the Ugandan journalistic

landscape: the migration of all major Ugandan media to the Internet and the emergence of

diaspora online news outlets that have actively sought and captured the attention of both the

diaspora and homeland readers. The question at the heart of the analysis here is do diaspora

online media engagements have the clout to sometimes determine the editorial agendas of the

institutional media in the homeland. Why would the online media of a far-flung diaspora

challenge the authority and credibility of an established homeland media formation, mobilize

the citizenry both at home and abroad for collective action and, in the process, change state

policies? These questions highlight the tricky convergence between traditional journalism and

alternative citizen journalism.

The growth of diaspora media outlets triggers important questions about the boundaries of

journalism. It is clear that many of the practitioners are not professional journalists in the

common academic sense of the term, they may not belong to recognised media houses, and in

most cases not educated as journalists yet they are heavily involved in endeavours that are

akin to journalism.

Ugandan diaspora online media

When Ugandan newspapers began to migrate their content to the Web in the early 2000s,

diaspora Ugandans flocked to their sites to read up on news about the homeland and to

discuss common topics of concern. This was a radical improvement on the previous state of

affairs when Ugandans who were displaced from the homeland waited for the occasional

newspapers from the homeland from people who travelled home or from the few Ugandan

grocery shops that sold hard copies of the papers in such Western cities as New York,

London and Berlin. However, it wasn’t long before Ugandans in the diaspora began

producing their own content online in what is largely assumed to be a form of alternative

journalism.

Some of the conceptions of alternative journalism locate it in binary opposition to what has

been understood as the mainstream media (Fenton, 2010). Alternative journalism is

journalism that is practiced by ordinary people, that is wholly user-generated, and in which

professional news judgment and gate-keeping, especially of the kind popularized by the

corporate media, are eliminated (Atton, 2003; 2009). The internet has made it a lot easier for

such media entities to circumvent harsh media regulatory environments particularly the ones

most associated with most of Africa. Some of the features of online alternative media

include: they are often operated by activists for progressive causes, they function as

resistance to monolithic commercialized media systems, they are located outside the forces of

the market economy and the state, they adopt counter-hegemonic reportorial practices (such

as native reporting and active witnessing) in newsgathering, they serve as counter-

information systems and agents of development power, they act as facilitators of social

communication rather than as sources of information, and they are more concerned with

nurturing a ‘mobilized’ citizenry than an ‘informed’ citizenry. It is this broad category of

Internet-enabled media, which includes the millions of news weblogs on the Internet, that

have been described as largely derivative, parasitic and little more than online eco chambers

of the hegemonic media (Cass Sunstein, 2001). But this is a broad-brush characterization that

ignores the fact that there are also alternative media entities whose characteristics mark them

out as independent media formations.

The few Ugandan diaspora online media identified do not deploy the kind of counter-

hegemonic news gathering practice touched on above. Instead, they use conventional

newsgathering practices to subversive ends. Furthermore, some of them are not just

facilitators of social communication but sources of information for ordinary Ugandan

citizens, the national elite and even the corporate media. Similarly, only one of the Ugandan

diaspora online media (UNAA Times) is affiliated with an organized social movement; the

Uganda North American Association (UNAA). The rest are sufficiently activist and

oppositional to the current government of Uganda with an agenda to cause tremendous

discomfiture to the state and to the national corporate media. And, although the content of

some of the Web sites can be derivative of and parasitic upon the mainstream homeland

media, they offer interpretations opposed to those offered in the mainstream media.

Nevertheless, the Ugandan diaspora news outlets not only compete with but vigorously

undermine the credibility of homeland mainstream media. The rise and popularity of

Ugandan diaspora online media can be partly attributed to the technical deficiency of the

Web sites of homeland media outlets. Their Web sites are neither updated in real-time nor are

they sufficiently interactive and multi-platform in the fashion of contemporary legacy media

Web sites in the West with which diaspora Ugandans have become familiar. But it is not only

the capacity to report on stories with multimedia and interactive corroborations that give the

diaspora media an edge; it is also their ability to report them in real time. The majority of

Uganda’s homeland newspapers’ Web sites are mere ‘shovel ware’ of their print editions.

They are, in the main, aesthetically unappealing, unintuitive, non-interactive, and lacking in

such basic technical capabilities as archiving. They are, in a way, stuck in the infancy of the

evolution of online journalism that Pavlik perceptively periodized (Pavlik, 1997). For web-

savvy, young Ugandans, including Ugandans in the diaspora whose privileged geographic

location exposes them to cutting-edge industry trends in the media, the diaspora online media

offers them a ‘taste of the real thing’ and keeps them in sync with the rest of the online media

‘world’

So, in an interesting reversal, while the mainstream media in the West ventured into online

journalism out of anxieties about the potentially disruptive effects that the emergent citizen

online journalism might have on their professional authority (Thurman and Hermida, 2010),

the Ugandan mainstream media’s lack of sophisticated web presence partly inspired the

emergence of Ugandan diaspora alternative news source, which now has the potential to

disrupt the authority and dominant journalistic practices of the homeland mainstream media.

However, the one big question still remains unanswered and requires in depth scholarship; do

the Ugandan diaspora online media outlets constitute a form of journalism or just mere rants

of disgruntled exiled Ugandans taking cheap pot shots at the government in the safety of their

living rooms in Europe and the USA?

Mark Deuze (2003) identifies three features that are fundamental to the possibility and

vitality of online journalism: interactivity (the ability for readers or audiences of online

content to react to or interact with and even adapt news content presented to them),

multimediality (the technical possibility for news content to be presented in multiple

platforms such as text, video, audio, and animated graphics), and hypertextuality (being able

‘to connect the story to other stories, archives, resources and so forth through hyperlinks’).

Alternative media consists of projects that tend to be edited, written and run by non-

professionals. Downing (1984) highlights a general political perspective of social anarchism

that informs and drives such media practices. To Downing, radical media and their

journalistic practices are in direct opposition to a construction of mainstream media that is

largely monolithic, centred on profit-making, hierarchical organization and a practice of

journalism that is implicitly exclusive. However, I do not seek to posit a binary opposition

between diaspora media excursions and mainstream media in Uganda. After all, some

elements of alternative diaspora media practices have not simply broken with mainstream

practices, they have often sought to radically redefine them. The diaspora websites and web

blogs feed off the mainstream media. The website www.ugandandiasporanews.com aims at

giving news about home to Ugandans in the diaspora which they cannot get from the

mainstream media. However, the news items that appear on their website are mostly stories

skimmed off from websites of mainstream media in Uganda. Their works also draw on

existing forms such as tabloid journalism and methods such investigative journalism.

Ugandan citizens living outside Uganda have adopted the blogging platform to create a venue

for alternate viewpoints. Initially, a handful of bloggers, writing mostly in English and

commenting on Ugandan culture especially music in their content initiated the Ugandan

blogosphere. They have since been joined by dozens of local language blogs. Their impact

has been noted, whether directly on politics and media or in their ability to enable civil

society by providing instant networking and expanding the space for freedom of expression.

They have also created an unexpected challenge to the government, causing inconsistent

reactions. Similar to their global counterparts, Ugandan diaspora bloggers are not necessarily

journalists, nor do they follow guidelines, press laws or ethical codes set for journalists in

Uganda. They are instead masters of producing and re-producing uncensored flows of

communication. Benefiting from the use of personalized digital technologies and powerful

innovative content, these ‘journalists’ are disrupting old media monopolies with the discourse

on their blogs and websites. However, some of the websites are controversial and activists by

orientation like the North American based www.musevenimustgo.com. The website is run by

a pressure group called ‘Dictator Museveni Must Go Revolution INC’. At a glance, one can

quickly conclude that the website is anti Museveni’s government. The articles are

interestingly similar to the types of stories that once made the defunct ‘Radio Katwe’s

website a one point stop for juicy gossip on the shenanigans of Uganda’s first family. Clearly

some of the stories lack journalistic principles of balance and objectivity. For instance one of

the stories ‘Is Uganda President, Yoweri Museveni HIV/Aids Positive’

(www.musevenimustgo.com, 2012) is by all account libellous and an invasion of the

President’s privacy. While some of the websites have patriotic titles like ‘Ugandans at heart’

and ‘Ugandan diaspora news’. A good number of these blogs are personal rants, have low

readership. Indeed, the blogging phenomenon has changed the information landscape. ‘They

(blogs) were the first tool that made it easy – or at least easier – to publish on the Web’

(Gillmor, 2004). Anyone with a computer now owns a press. No longer are individuals

merely consumers, they are now also producers of information. Whether all this user

generated content can be considered journalism, is questionable. The acts of ‘blogging’ and

‘journalism’ are different, although they do intersect. While some blogging is journalism,

much of it isn’t and doesn’t aim to be. Both serve different and valuable functions within the

new evolving media ecosystem.

It is interesting to see how the Ugandan online forums go on overdrive whenever there is a

story on mainstream media regarding government’s ‘misdemeanours’. Much as the

mainstream media have a recognised online presence, the general perception among

Ugandans is that comments posted on their websites are heavily censored. It is common to

see posts with frustrated tones on major newspaper websites like ‘don’t bother to write a

comment here because it won’t be published’.

The convergence of diaspora and new media enhances mobilisation which can enable ethnic

communities to globally react, communicate, share resources, and mobilize in reaction to

global events. Marginalized discourses can be published without having to enter into the

traditional top-down editorial processes that Adorno and Horkheimer (1976) are so critical of.

It therefore introduces the possibility of resistance that is inherent in every relationship of

power (Foucault 1983). This ‘new media’ has brought quite a wave of intensity in many ways

not witnessed before. Some of these intense changes include, structural changes in cultural

and economic dynamics, dissolving of national boundaries in terms of trade, beliefs,

democratic processes, customs and cultures, a shift in employment and skills level at all

levels, and a weakened control of power mechanisms, by governments (Banda, 2003). Social

networking and social media, especially blogs, have blossomed in Uganda. The country has

many active bloggers but most remain anonymous because they fear their opinions will result

in jail or reprisal from authorities.

It is perhaps fair to say that the first diaspora online news outlet to grace the Ugandan media

landscape was a little known online radio website known as ‘Radio Katwe’. In local Ugandan

speak, ‘Radio Katwe’ refers to word of mouth or a rumour channel. The authenticity of

stories on ‘Radio Katwe’ was questionable because to date, it is not known who ran it and

where it was based. However, because it emerged in 2001; a time when online media was a

novelty in Uganda, it is assumed the website was run from outside Uganda. Radio Katwe

gained notoriety for publishing a range of stories, including extremely critical reports

targeting President Yoweri Museveni, his family, and his ruling party much to the amusement

of Ugandans both at home and abroad. The site encouraged readers to submit stories for

publication but did not identify individual authors or editors. In 2006, the Ugandan

government countered Radio Katwe’s ‘malicious’ ‘journalism’ by blocking internal access to

its website (IFEX, 2006). Radio Katwe was very popular with the readers as it brought out

stories that the mainstream media wouldn’t dare to publish. It appears Radio Katwe has since

died a natural death and its place has been taken over by the firebrand USA based group

‘Museveni must go’.

Ugandan diaspora media; journalism or sour grapes

There is scant attention to the transnational online journalistic practices of Ugandans in the

diaspora and what impacts these practices have had and continue to have on not just the form

and content of journalistic practices in Uganda but also on the national politics of the country.

In fact many Ugandans in the diaspora actively engage with the domestic public sphere

through trans-national, diaspora-generated online media outlets and homeland online news

outlets. There is an emergence of popular diaspora online media outlets that now engage in

perpetual political and cultural dialogues with the homeland. This seems to have bestowed a

robust synthesis between the digital media of the Ugandan diaspora and that of Ugandans in

the homeland.

Theoretically, the chapter makes use of models related to journalistic professionalism,

particuarly Mark Deuze’s (2005) typology which outlines a set of five values that define

professional journalism as it has emerged in the research tradition: public service, objectivity,

autonomy, immediacy and ethics. These five values, each of which are associated with a

cluster of sub-values, are ideal-type norms and do not necessarily denote actual journalism

practice; nevertheless, they pretend to constitute a comprehensive approach to defining a

common professional identity for journalists, at least in Western societies. Deuze (2005),

however, goes on to argue that each of the values is contested in contemporary journalism

owing to multimedia and multicultural realities. It is towards this latter argument the present

analysis of Ugandan diaspora journalism bears significance. Diaspora media channels, as

elaborated earlier, are likely to challenge traditional journalism outlets both in form, function

and raison d’être, thus making an examination of the effect on journalism ideology

meaningful.

However, I will focus particularly on two ideal values; objectivity and autonomy. Objectivity,

prescribing that journalists should strive to be impartial, neutral, balanced, fair and unbiased

in reporting, is of interest because diaspora websites tend to rely heavily on a limited number

of individuals, thus being less defined by institutional conformity and correctives. The second

value dimension that is paid particular attention in the analysis below, autonomy, stipulates

that journalists should be free and independent in their work. But how diaspora journalists

position themselves in relation to the audience also bears significance. The continuum on this

dimension goes from exclusivity (journalism should be reserved for professionals) to

inclusivity (anyone can engage in journalistic activities). The significance of this dimension

owes to the assumed breakdown of the boundaries between content producers and consumers

through new media technology. If these boundaries fade out, the situation is also likely to

affect journalists’ self-identity as media professionals. In classic journalism practice,

however, the public’s engagement neither involves content production on equal basis with

professional journalists nor does it involve a sharing of editorship (Rosen, 1996; Black,

1997). Thus, each of these two dimensions, objectivity, autonomy, are significant

determinants in the assessment of journalism professionalism as expressed by the Ugandan

online diaspora media channels.

Much of the scholarship on alternative journalism in Africa consist of case studies on

political crises (in Kenya: Mäkinen & Kuira, 2008; Goldstein & Rotich, 2008; Zuckerman,

2009; in Zimbabwe: Moyo, 2009). The total body of research remains small, although useful

Africa specific normative frameworks for the analysis of alternative journalism are supplied

by Goldstein & Rotich (2008) and Banda (2010). A comprehensive literature review is

provided by Mutsvairo & Columbus (2012). The news stories on the Ugandan diaspora

websites and blogs are presented in a conversational style. According to Friend and Singer

(2007), one factor driving this new media phenomenon is dissatisfaction with the traditional

model of journalists gathering and presenting an information ‘product’ to an audience – a

one-way Street. The Web’s interactive capability has been the most dominant feature of the

new media landscape. It has spawned passionate, public conversations among a throng of

diverse voices and perspectives and led to the return of a point-of-view style of news writing

(Friend and Singer, 2007). The conversation promoted by this type of reporting allows for a

wide range of differing viewpoints and opinions. Because of conversation, objectivity is not

as important since most sides of the topic are still covered, even though the information might

come from different sources.

The news stories on the websites and blogs tend to concentrate on political issues. It follows

that the classic distinction between fact and opinion is habitually overstepped. News reports

are edited with the view to induce a political slant in presentation and terminology. A most

striking example is that of the word ‘government’ casually replaced with ‘regime’ when

referring to the Ugandan national leadership. The few diaspora media channels appear to be

well entrenched in the Ugandan community but the news is marked by stark favouritism

towards opposition to the present National Resistance Movement (NRM) government. This

also reflects the fragmented nature of the country Uganda. The diaspora and kin groups live

in a symbiotic relationship in which they support each other economically and ideologically.

The diaspora media channels operate somewhere along the continuum between professional

journalism and activism. Judged by common journalistic criteria, the Ugandan websites; like

other amateur content on the Internet, have a number of weaknesses. The news reports often

appear to be biased and sometimes directly misinforming. The writers often use pseudonyms

and do not take proper responsibility for the posted allegations. Despite genuine intentions,

the Ugandan diaspora media, which almost always operate on a volunteer basis, lack the

resources to provide a solid journalistic contribution.

The lack of distinction between fact and opinion is also evident in the organizing of the

articles as well as in the register of contributors. It is common for the websites and blogs to

organize news articles and commentaries under the same heading with no tangible

distinction. Those familiar with Ugandan politics will recognize the position of contributors

by means of their by-line and thereby assume that they take on the role of commentators or

political actors rather than reporters. Some of the writers are among the most experienced

politicians and academicians in Ugandan public life, now resuming their operations from the

perspective of the diaspora. For outsiders not familiar with Ugandan politics, it may prove

demanding to navigate through the subtle allusions associated with writers and issues. For

readers of Ugandan origin, however, the bias associated with the websites and blogs is part

and parcel of their operation, and attempts at objectivity or impartiality are foreign to this

mission.

It is also unlikely that the Ugandan diaspora online bloggers have the skills or time to do their

own research or investigations thus rarely publishing anything that amounts to first-hand

reporting or information. There are of course outstanding exceptions. The claims that blogs

‘are at the centre of media democratisation’ (Knobel 2005: 28) does not apply to Uganda yet

because the Ugandan blogosphere is still highly dependent on the main stream media news-

gathering and the parasitic relationship only serves to lock bloggers into responding to the

main news of the day rather than blogging all the news that isn’t fit to print although it can

also be argued that links to news material creates conversation and debate with gatekeepers

guiding readers to ‘best of’, different from the more censorious role of gatekeepers deployed

in traditional models of journalism to set up a ‘radically different kind of news discourse’

(Hass 2005: 388). Nevertheless, it remains that no matter how alternative the dialogue, it is

mainstream media that define what is and makes news, with bloggers following their lead

rather than shaping alternative news agendas. Indeed, the opportunity to change mainstream

consciousness by taking on issues largely ignored or shunned by traditional media, has for the

most part been missed by the Ugandan diaspora online media community.

It is also somewhat misleading to present the Ugandan diaspora blogs and websites blogs as

forums committed only to spreading the democratic word. While some blogs show

commitment to holding those in the upper echelons of power to account, most bloggers are

logging the minutiae of dull lives, spreading gossip or talking celebrity. Rather than being a

‘truth squad’ (Gillmor 2004), Redden (2003) argue that bloggers are not ‘committed to truth,

accuracy, objectivity and fairness’ or known for checking their facts.

Online forums have been praised by many as free public spheres of political deliberation-a

‘civic common’ in cyberspace (Blumler and Coleman, 2001; Klein, 1999) but the Ugandan

online forum fosters a poor quality of interaction and has a tendency to produce a plurality of

deeply segmented political associations. The posts and comments on popular Ugandan

diaspora blogs like www.ugandansatheart; www.ugandandiasporanews.com ;

www.musevenimustgo.com all point to a like-minded group of people who seek to have their

views reinforced rather than challenged by alternative perspectives. As Cass Sunstein (2001)

argues, this corrodes democracy.

Conclusion

While it is encouraging to acknowledge the emergence of the Ugandan diaspora online media

presence, there is no doubting their popularity. The surge of interest in websites and blogs run

by Ugandans in the diaspora is more attributed to their entertainment value than rising

political or social awareness or bands of citizens demanding an alternative to mainstream

media. Nevertheless, such online media platforms such as blogs do typify the promise of the

internet as a non-hierarchical network that promotes access to vast flows of unmediated

information and enables dissemination of alternative content that empowers citizens and

fosters participatory democracy. And in many ways this is true. We should look through the

beguiling suggestions of openness and reciprocity carried by the image of the diaspora

alternative journalism to the real inadequacies. Rather than jump on utopian bandwagons,

claims for the democratising potential of the Ugandan diaspora online media, we ought not to

ignore the social embeddedness of technology if they are to be consistent with what we know

about the media, political participation, social structures and especially, the political

individual. By and large, the Ugandan diaspora online media still has a momentous mountain

to climb in order to start determining the news agenda in Uganda and influence government

policies. For the moment, their efforts are frowned upon by government and dismissed as the

barking of a toothless stray dog. Until they start investigating and reporting on hard hitting

stories without the urge to regurgitate what the mainstream media is serving up, the Ugandan

diaspora online media shall just remain ‘one of those internet’ charlatans.

References

African Media Barometer (AMB), Uganda 2012. Accessed on the 24 September 2012 from

http://www.fes-uganda.org/media/pdf/AMB%20Uganda%202012.pdf

Agrawal A, Kapur D and McHale J (2008). How do spatial and social proximity influence

Knowledge flows? Evidence from patent data. Journal of Urban Economics. 64(2):

258–269.

Agrawal A, Kapur D, McHale J and Oettl A (2011). Brain drain or brain bank? The impact of

Skilled emigration on poor-country innovation. Journal of Urban Economics. 69(1):

43–55.

Alonso, Adoni and Olarzabal J. Pedro. (2010). Diasporas in the New Media Age. Identity,

Politics and Community. Nevada: University of Nevada Press

Appadurai, Arjun. (1996). Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press

(2001). Globalization. Durham, NC: Duke University Press

Atton, C. (2003). What is ‘alternative’ journalism? Journalism: Theory, Practice, Criticism,

4(3), 267-272.

(2009). ‘Alternative and Citizen Journalism’. In K. Wahl-Jorgensen

and T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), The Handbook of journalism studies (pp. 265-278). New York: Routledge.

Banda, F. 2003. Community radio broadcasting in Zambia: a policy perspective. PhD thesis,

University of South Africa, Pretoria.

(2010). Citizen Journalism & Democracy in Africa. Grahamstown, South Africa:

Highway Africa.

Black, J. (ed.) (1997) Mixed news. The Public/Civic/Communitarian Journalism Debate.

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Blumler, Jay G., and Jules Coleman. 2001. Realising Democracy Online: A Civic Commons

in Cyberspace. IPPR/Citizens Online Research Publication No.2 - March 2001.

Dahan, M. and G. Sheffer (2001) ‘Ethnic groups and distance shrinking communication

technologies’, Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 7, 85–107.

Castles, S. and A. Davidson (2000) Citizenship and Migration: Globalization and the Politics

of Belonging. New York: Routledge.

Clifford, J. (1994) ‘Diasporas’, Cultural Anthropology, 9, 302–38.

Cohen, R. (1997). Global Diasporas. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.

Deuze, Mark. (2003). ‘The Web and its Journalisms: Considering the Consequences of

Different Types of News media Online.’ New Media & Society 5 no. 2 (2003), 206.

(2005) ‘What is journalism? Professional identity and ideology of journalists

reconsidered’, Journalism 6(4): 442–64.

Downing, John. (1984). Radical Media: The Political Experience of Alternative

Communication. Boston, Mass.: South End Press

Faist, T. (2000) The Volume and Dynamics of International Migration and Transnational

Social Spaces. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Fenton, Natalie. (2010). New Media, Old News. Journalism and Democracy in the Digital

Age. London: Sage Publications.

Foucault, Michel. (1983). ‘The Subject and Power’. Afterword. Michel Foucault: Beyond

Structuralism and Hermeneutics. 2nd ed. Hubert Dreyfus and Paul Rainbow.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 208-26.

Friend, Cecilia, and Jane B. Singer. (2007). Online Journalism Ethics: Traditions and

Transitions. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Print.

Georgiou, M. (2002) ‘Diasporic Communities On-Line: A Bottom Up Experience of

Transnationalism’, Hommes et Migrations (accessed on 1 May 2006)

www.lse.ac.uk/collections/EMTEL/ Minorities/papers/hommesmigrations.doc

Georgiou, M. (2006). Diaspora, Identity and the Media: Diasporic Transnationalism and

Mediated spacialities. Creskill, N.J: Hampton Press

Gillmor, Dan. (2004). We The Media: Grassroots Journalism by the People, for the People.

California: O’Reilly Media, Inc. Goldstein, J. and Rotich, J. (2008). Digitally Networked Technology in Kenya's 2007-2008

Post-Election Crisis. Harvard University. Available at:

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/publications/2008/Digitally_Networked_Technology_Ke

nyas_Post-Election_Crisis

Hass, T. (2005) ‘From ‘Public Journalism’ to the ‘Public’s Journalism’? Rhetoric and reality

in the discourse on weblogs’ in Journalism Studies vol. 6 no. 3 pp. 387-396

Hiller, H.H., Franz, T.M. (2004). New ties and old ties and lost ties: the use of the internet in

diaspora. New Media and Society, 6(6), 731.

Horkheimer, M., and Adorno, T.W. (1976). Dialectic of Enlightenment. New York:

Continuum

IFEX. (2006). Critical website Radio Katwe blocked on eve of presidential election.

Accessed on 13th

April 2012 from

http://www.ifex.org/uganda/2006/02/23/critical_website_radio_katwe_blocked/

Jacobsen, D. (2002) Place and Belonging in America. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins

University Press.

Janet, Kolodzy. (2006). Convergence Journalism: Writing and Reporting across the News

Media. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Kang, T. (2009). Home land re-territorialised. Information, Communication and Society.

12(3), 326-343

Karim, K. H. (2003) ‘Mapping diasporic mediascapes’, in K. H. Karim (ed.) The media of

diaspora, London: Routledge Press, 1–18.

Klein, H. (1999) ‘Tocqueville in Cyberspace: Using the Internet for Citizen Associations.

Information Society 15 (4), pp. 213-20

Knobel, L. (2005) ‘Nullius in verba: Navigating Through the New Media Democracy’, in

Mills, J (ed.) Barons to Bloggers: Confronting Media Power, Carlton: The

Miegunyah Press

Lugalambi. W.G., Mwesigye. G.P and Bussiek. H. (2010). Public Broadcasting in Africa

Series. On Air: Uganda. Nairobi: Open Society Initiative for East Africa.

Mäkinen M. & Kuira, M.W. (2008). Social Media and Postelection Crisis in Kenya. The

International Journal of Press/Politics 13(3): 328-335.

Mitra, A. (1997). Virtual commonality: Looking for India on the Internet. In (Ed.

Steve Jones), Virtual Culture. Newbury Park: SAGE.

Moyo, D. (2009). Citizen Journalism and the Parallel Market of Information in Zimbabwe’s

2008 Election. Journalism Studies 10(4): 551-567.

Mutsvairo, B. & Columbus, S. (2012). Emerging Patterns and Trends in Citizen Journalism in

Africa: A Case of Zimbabwe. Central European Journal of Communication, 5(1).

(forthcoming).

Mwesige, Peter G. (2003). ‘A Profile of Ugandan Journalists in the New Millennium.’ The

East African Media and Globalisation: Defining the Public Interest. Ed. Goretti Linda

Nassanga. Kampala: Mass Communication Department, Makerere University, 2003.

203-225.

Pavlik, John V. (1997). ‘The Future of Online Journalism.’ Columbia Journalism Review 36

No. 2 (1997): 30–38.

Redden, G, Caldwell, N & Nguyen A. (2003) ‘Warblogging As Critical Social Practice’ in

Southern Review vol. 36 no. 2, pp. 68-79

Rosen, J. (1996) Getting the connections right. Public journalism and the troubles of the

press. New York: The Twentieth Century Fund.

Safran, W. (1991) ‘Diasporas in Modern Societies: Myths of Homeland and Return’,

Diaspora 1(1): 83–99.

Sheffer, G. (1986). Modern Diasporas in International Politics. London: Croom Helm.

Sunstein, Cass. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton: Princeton University Press

Thurman, N. & Hermida, A. (2010). Gotcha: How newsroom norms are shaping

participatory journalism online. In: S Tunney & G Monaghan (Eds.), Web

Journalism: A New Form of Citizenship? (pp. 46 - 62). Eastbourne, UK: Sussex

Academic Press

Uganda Diaspora News (2012). Uganda needs strategic national Diaspora development

Policy. Retrieved from http://www.ugandandiasporanews.com/2012/07/11/ on 30th

August 2012

Uganda Communications Commission. 2009/10 Posts and Telecommunications Review,

sourced from: www.ucc.co.ug/endOfFYReview2011.pdf

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). The Least Developed

Countries Report 2012. Harnessing Remittances and Diaspora Knowledge to Build

Productive Capacities. Accessed on 25th

November from

http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ldc2012_en.pdf

Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA), Government of Uganda. Accessed on 15th

October

2012 from

http://www.mofa.go.ug/diaspora/page/open/title/About_DSD

http://www.musevenimustgo.com/index.php?_exp_=1&id=NEWS&newsid=215. Is Uganda

President, Yoweri Museveni allegedly HIV/Aids Positive? Retrieved on 30th

August

2012

Van Hear, N. (1998) New Diasporas. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.

Zuckerman, E. (2009). Citizen Media and the Kenyan Electoral Crisis. In S. Allan & E.

Thorsen (eds.), Citizen Journalism: Global Perspectives. New York, NY: Peter Lang.