The Westernizer, the Developer and the Azmari:

Journalism Discourses in Ethiopia

By Melissa Wall

A Paper Presented to the Annual Conference of the

International Communications Association Conference, Acapulco June 2000

The end of the 20th century saw an unprecedented change in the African media scene. Across the
continent, privately owned media suddenly come into being: grass-roots talk radio, competing television
stations, and most noticeable of all --- hundreds of new independent newspapers. Some publications are
produced by two or three people and fail after one issue; others employ dozens of workers and have
become popular fixtures in their nation's capitals. Observers believe the changes have come about partly
in response to Africans' dissatisfaction with corrupt leaders and mismanaged economies. Also important
has been the end of the Cold War which has found Western donor countries demanding evidence of
democratization efforts for continuation of funding. Often this has required that countries allow an
independent, privately owned press to open (Blake, 1997; Bourgault, 1995; Kasoma, 1995, 1997). In
some cases this new press has disseminated "pluralistic views" and directly contributed to
democratization in Africa (Ogbondah, 1997, p. 28; Kasoma, 1995, 1997). In other cases, this press has
been accused of irresponsible, sensational reporting (Kasoma, 1997).

This study argues that the new African press is part of a global shift concerning information. First, we
have seen a global information explosion. While CNN, satellite radio and the Internet have come to
Africa, the explosion on the continent has been particularly strong in print media. Secondly, the nature of
news and journalism are changing as global economic, political and technical trends influence conditions
shaping local practices. From America's Internet gossip columnists to Africa's new press, populists
around the world have tried to claim a communicative space in this changing information scene.

The newness of independent African journalism means its roles and its practices are not yet set in
stone. As Francis Kasoma (1997) writes, "There has not been much of an independent press in Africa,"
and, therefore, little is known about the African journalists who are putting out these new publications (p.
540). This research project seeks to better our understanding through a specific case study of Ethiopia's
journalism. Ethiopia is an important country to examine because it has a unique history as one of the two
countries in Africa that was never colonized and, unlike most African countries, it has for centuries had its
own written alphabet and chirographic culture. The presence of colonizers and oral cultures have
previously been described as major influences on the African press (Ainslie, 1967; Hachten, 1971;
Bourgault, 1993, 1995; Mohamed, 1997). The research questions posed here focus on discovering what
Ethiopian journalists' discourses are concerning a) press-government relations; b) press-audience
relations; and c) journalists' identities. In addition, this project creates a new non-Western set of
guidelines for media’s role in social change against which to compare the Ethiopian and, potentially, other
nonWestern media.

Literature Review
Journalist Identities. One of the first people to describe the role of the African journalist was Kwame
Nkrumah (1965) who believed that there were three types of African journalists: Those who worked to
serve the interests of private capital; those who worked to serve the interests of foreigners; and those
who were devoted to the cause of African revolution. The only acceptable model for Nkrumah was the
latter, which would serve as a collective organizer, mobilizer and educator. Among the studies of African
journalists, Frank Ugboajah (1985) found that Nigerian journalists were highly likely to belong to
professional journalist associations and those with higher levels of education were less likely to stay in the
profession. Their most likely destination was politics. In Graham Mytton's (1983) study of Nigeria
journalists, he argued that they were unable to find a middle ground between criticism and sycophancy.
Charles Okigbo (1987) divided Nigerian journalists perspectives into three groups: those who were
focused on self criticism of their own performance; those who focused on following a traditional Western
ideology of the press; and those who believed they needed more press freedom. Both William Hachten
(1979) and William Finnegan (1988) found that black South African journalists viewed their work
differently from whites and were much less able to be "objective" under apartheid. Hachten (1971) also
argued that African journalists lacked social status, which he believed they would only gain through
professionalization. Leslie Fordred (1997) found that post-apartheid, some black South African journalists
were practicing a communitarian form of journalism.

In East Africa, Paul Groswiler (1997) surveyed Tanzanian journalists and found four new journalist
roles emerging in relation to the changing media scene. These are: the competitive populist who supports
a private press that focuses on development issues; the status quo builder who supports a government-
run press that focuses on building up the professional status of journalists; the development promoter
who supports a government media that works in rural areas and with marginalized groups; and the critical
reformer who supports a private press that distrusts government, believes in "democratization of news,"
and hates censorship. In her survey of Kenyan journalists, Carol Pauli (1999) compared attitudes of
Kenyan journalists with that of American ones, discovering that the African journalists were more willing to
go to jail, join professional organizations, and to support a populist approach to journalism in which
ordinary people are given more of a voice. These two studies are important because they focus on
journalists in the currently changing media scene and they provide the beginnings of a framework against
which to compare other journalists in East Africa and beyond. Among the important findings are the
range of the journalists' attitudes toward government, and the perceived professional roles of journalists
(including attitudes toward jailings, and the new populist press).

Journalism roles. More broadly, various observers have identified two or three main models for
African journalism over the years. Rosalynde Ainslie (1967) wrote that the African press followed either a
revolutionary, government-owned model or an independently owned, government watchdog model.
Hachten (1971) believed that the two main influences on the African press were the settler tradition and
the nationalist tradition. The former press was either government owned or privately owned but heavily
government influenced. Both were aimed at elites. The latter (the nationalist) was indigenous and
political, agitating for change. Other scholars have identified three main models: the government-owned
development oriented model; the western style, privately owned model; and the traditional/nationalist
populist model (Heath, 1997). These three traditions in various forms have appeared and reappeared
throughout African journalism's history. The level of influence of each tradition depends upon which
country is being discussed.

The first model -- the government-owned media -- is based on modernization theory and aims to
contribute to nation building. The press is seen as a tool for establishing national unity and imparting
constructive criticism and mass education. Under this model, the media have often become "praise
singers" for Africa's leaders. These media are funded by and dependent on government. The second
model -- privately owned, commercial media -- is often called an "independent press." This model follows
the Western idea of media providing information for citizens to make informed decisions and serving as a
government watchdog. It is funded by and dependent upon advertisers. The third model derives from the
anti-colonialist independence movements. Critical of the powers that be, these media are often written in
local languages, are often sensational, and/or politically partisan. They usually are poorly funded, and
thus dependent on political parties and other associations and/or upon street sales.

Many explanations of the African press have tended to be inspired by the four theories of the press
which focus on Western ideals concerning government-press relations (Wilcox, 1975; Hachten, 1992).
However, such explanations have been accused of being ethnocentric (Eribo & Jong-Ebot, 1997). In
response, some researchers have changed the dialogue about African media by offering cultural
explanations for how the media work (Bourgault, 1993, 1995; Mohamed, 1997). Mohamed (1997) argues
that a Western-style "free press" probably will never take root in Africa because it is based on Western
notions of individual rights and responsibilities which he says are culturally incompatible with the
collective philosophies of Africans. Bourgault (1995) also argues that Western-inspired ideals can lead
Africans to become alienated from their own audiences and cultures. She writes (1995), "an opinion
press, one to which advocacy comes naturally, derives from an orally-based culture - one where there is
little distance between the reporters, the subject and the audience. A didactic press [also] emerges quite
comfortably . . . objectivity is a near impossibility" (p. 199). However, these explanations too have been
criticized for being derived from Western researcher's frameworks (Bourgault works from Walter Ong's
theories of orality and Mohamed uses Edward T. Hall's theories of culture and communication).

This project seeks to create a framework of recommendations for media and social change based on
nonWestern theorists. This model draws from the writing of Frantz Fanon, Ali Mazrui and Paulo Freire --
all of whom have addressed the nature of social change in non-Western, specifically African contexts.
Fanon's writings cited here focus on his observations of the Algerian revolution and how the population
adapted its traditions to changing needs. Mazrui has written extensively about social change in Africa
and its various influences. Freire, although Brazilian, spent time in West Africa trying to implement his
theories concerning conscientization. Each of these has their supporters and detractors; each to a
certain extent has been criticized because their ideas often did not directly correspond with reality, often
being too idealistic to enact. Nevertheless, it is important to offer normative guidelines for how the media
might contribute to social change as an ideal to be worked toward in an on-going process. Ideals offer us
both hope and a vision of what the media might be.

Frantz Fanon (1963/1979; 1967) suggested that the mass media play both a positive and a negative
role in social change. The difference comes in part within the role of the audience. Fanon believed in the
power of an active audience. Indeed, he wrote that audiences denied information would make up their
own "true lies" (Fanon, 1967, p. 87). By this he means that the exact information is not as important as
long as the political essence it supports is to true the people's needs. He was also concerned with the
role of the educated classes as cultural producers. How could they prevent themselves from assuming
the roles of the Western elites whom they replaced? He suggests professionals must keep themselves
close to ordinary people to prevent alienation.

In his more recent work, Ali Mazrui (1996) discusses how development can occur without creating
dependency. Three of his suggestions are key for this study: Indigenization; horizontal integration; and
domestication. Indigenization would include using "indigenous techniques, personnel, and approaches to
purposeful change" (p. 4). He believes that local languages should be used in indigenization processes.
Discourses based on local languages, he writes, are more likely to allow non-Western conceptualizations
to develop. Horizontal integration calls for the return of Pan Africanism in which Africans locate and
celebrate the collectively shared parts of their culture. Domestication is a strategy that involves "making
imported institutions more relevant for Africa" (p. 6).

Finally, Paulo Freire (1970) has written much about social change and included in his writings his
thoughts on communication. He believed one of the most powerful tools ordinary people must maintain
is their ability to "name the world." That is, ordinary people need to be given a voice in order to transform
the world. Freire also wrote about the need to identify problems so that ordinary people could reflect
upon these problems and then take action. Like Fanon and Mazrui, he was concerned with how to
prevent outside cultures from taking over through the professional classes. He argued that professionals
needed to keep themselves near the people, be respectful of their views and be willing to have a two-way
dialogue because "without dialogue, there is no communication" (p. 81). Professionalization should only
be a means to aid transformation not a means to consolidate power.

Below, the ideas of these thinkers have been used to create a series of guidelines for how the African
media should ideally operate.

The Ethiopian press derives from a different tradition than most African countries. Like Liberia,
Ethiopia was never colonized and thus a nationalist press never developed. A type of "settler" press did
make an appearance, but lacked the consistency and influence that it had in other countries. The first
newspapers were French, then Italian following their 1930s invasion, then British following the end of
World War II and finally in the 1960s, the United States funded an Ethiopian-run paper (S. Pankhurst,
1955; Seawell, 1971; Fanouris & Fanouris, 1995). None of these was as long-lasting or influential as the
papers in Ethiopia's southern neighbor, Kenya, for example. Instead, the press consisted of government-
run organs which were mainly praise-singers for the emperor (Clapman, 1969; Seawell, 1971; Barton,
1979; Debebe, 1978). Also, Ethiopia has a history of a written language and producing hand written texts
for hundreds of years. Because of these circumstances, it is possible that Ethiopia's journalism
discourses may be different from that of other African countries.

Methodology
This study operates from an interpretive perspective, employing both interviewing and qualitative
content analysis as its research methods. Both were used to locate discourses used by Ethiopian
journalists to create meanings concerning journalism. The research questions were: What models for
journalism are suggested by the journalist's discourses about a) the relationship between journalism and
the government, b) between journalism and the public and c) the identities of journalists. Fourteen media
professionals were interviewed for periods ranging from 45 minutes to 2 hours. Subjects included editors
as well as former journalists. All comments are anonymous. All but one subject was interviewed at their
place of work in Addis Ababa. A set of similar questions was asked each journalist, although interviews
occasionally delved into other questions depending on the situation. At two publications, two journalists
were interviewed together.

The subjects were chosen to include a variety of perspectives on journalism (as indicated by the
content of the publication they edited), as well as to reflect a range of ages and experience levels. 5
journalists were over 50 years old; 5 in their 40s; 2 in their 30s; and 2 in their 20s. 4 had received
journalism training abroad; 7 had at some point in their careers worked for the government media; 5 had
less than 10 years journalism experience. The subjects appear to be slightly skewed toward older, more
experienced journalists, but this is to be expected as they were all current or former editors and/or
publishers rather than just reporters. The interviews occurred over a three-week period in the middle of
the author's three-month stay in Ethiopia as a journalism trainer.

After all the interviews were complete, the journalist's comments were reviewed, looking for patterns.
Three clearly identifiable discourses emerged. Because it is possible that the journalists were providing
answers that did not entirely reflect what they believe, the author triangulated the information from their
interviews with a) a series of informal meetings and discussions over a three-month period with three
different key informants -- Ethiopians who were knowledgeable about the Ethiopian press; and b) a
textual analysis of discourses on journalism in the publications the journalists worked for. That is, did
they print similar ideas to those that appeared in their interviews, or did they articulate something
different? A 2-month sample of newspapers edited by eight of the journalists was analyzed. Each paper
was read looking for articles about the media. These articles were then closely examined to see how
they talked about the three areas under consideration (press-government relations; press-audience
relations; and journalists' identities). The discourses that the journalists used in print were very similar to
those that appeared in their interviews.

Findings & Discussion

Both the interviews and the publications consistently reflected three main discourses concerning the
roles of journalism in Ethiopia. Results from the analysis of both interviews and the textual analysis will
therefore be reported together here. These discourses were: the Westernizer, the Developer and the
Azmari. The first discourse, the Westernizer, embodies a strongly Western influenced press philosophy,
believing that the media should be a watchdog and based on a capitalistic model. The second discourse,
the Developer, follows the established pattern in many African countries of using the media to contribute
to nation building and to support the government. The third discourse, the Azmari, reflects previously
identified cultural tendencies toward a political, populist press. Each of these is summarized in Table 1
below.

TABLE 1: Ethiopian Journalism Discourses

Relation
Type of Discourse Journalist Identities Relation w/Public
w/Government

Westernizer
Watchdog Professionals Claims to speak for

Developer
Supports Not yet professionals Serves from a distance

Azmari
Watchdog Populist partisans Seen as collaborators

The Westernizer The Westernizer follows the Western liberal tradition of the press, believing that the
media should operate objectively and serve as a watchdog of the government. According to this
discourse, only a commercial press can fulfill this role because it is free from government control. As one
article noted, "The independent press must struggle to live up to this task of serving as a public watchdog
or else lose its credibility." One journalist said that newspapers should not take sides, but rather
"entertain all ideas objectively." This discourse also emphasizes the role of the media in a democracy.
Another publication reported, "The press is indispensable to the advancement of any form of
democracy."

Freedom of the press consists of allowing the media to collect and disseminate information without
censorship by the government or the harassment that leads to self-censorship, according to various
editors. One editor defined it as "being able to look at a development or issue and be able to examine it,
gather information about it without any problems and once you find the information to be able to write
about it for presentation without self censorship." A publication noted, "if there is a need of censorship,
this should only be made at the marketplace of ideas" while another reported the "press and censorship
are simply incompatible." However, press freedom has to be exercised responsibly. As one journalist
said, "it is not freedom without limitations," while a publication declared that "The press should be more
responsible, more objective and less driven by emotion and hostility."

As for jailing journalists, the Westernizer discourse did not seem to court jail the way the Azmari did,
yet was also not as careful to advocate avoiding it as the Developer discourse was. One journalist said
about being jailed: "It leaves something in your mind. Before that I never thought that anything could
happen. It makes you more cautious . . . [yet] it makes us more outspoken."
 The relationship with the public appears to be a distant one in which the public is the recipient of the
press' information which the public is suppose to use to make its decisions. Although one publication
noted that "in a free press, informing the public is primary," this discourse tended to emphasize
audiences as passive receivers. One journalist explained that in part having dozens of publications to
choose from is a phenomenon the public is still getting used to. "It is a whole new tradition in Ethiopia"
and the public will become "more conscious of the papers."
This discourse sees journalists as professionals committed to Western journalism ideals of public
service. Anyone practicing any other kind of journalism doesn't belong in this line of work. One journalist
added that true journalists work for higher good and that "we try to select the best professionals . . . We
discourage people who work for the money." In part, their self-definition is accomplished through
identifying what they find deplorable in the Azmari and Developer discourses. A journalist said that "we
are serious journalists," which set them apart from the Azmari journalists whom they accuse of being shrill
and harmful. Another journalist said, "It's a question of competence."

One publication reported that the press should "not play the role of a political opposition." Another story
reported that the current Azmari press is "captive of its fixation with individual leaders and high
government officials instead of presenting a well-articulated criticism of their policies." A journalist
explained that "newspapers should have news on page one and a separate page for opinion." The press
is "deplorable," one publication reported, when it employs "hate mongering, ethnic prejudice or outright
libelous practices that have nothing to do with serious journalism." One editor said that for the Azmari
journalist, "everything boils down to 'we don't want this government.' They start with a conclusion.
Information comes later." As for the government media, newspapers noted that "no press can sing the
praise of the government without jeopardizing its very objectivity and independence." Newspaper stories
repeatedly noted that such media lacks "professional freedom " which would allow it to "go anywhere to
report, write, criticize or pay tribute as the occasion permits." Among their worst sins, according to the
Westernizing discourse, was to be "fawning" toward government.

The Developer The Developer discourse reflects the long-established practice of seeing the media as
a development tool. One publication noted that "reporting development activities under implementation in
line with the development plans is one of the major tasks" of the media, which also "play an important
role in the implementation of proclamations and regulations" issued by the government. This discourse
also tends to see successful communication as something to be measured in new equipment and
expanded services. Thus it was not unusual to read a celebratory story about state-owned printing
company that "played a notable contribution in helping boost the country's overall literacy."

The press "should serve government and the people" by providing a "dialogue," according to one
editor. Criticism should be constructive and not necessarily the main content of a publication. As one
journalist noted, "Not everything is bad in this country. There are a lot of good things in the daily life that
the media should reflect." Another said, "There is so much to write about in this country without creating
antagonisms."

As for freedom of the press, an editor defined it as "Freedom from suppression that hinders a person
from telling the truth'" but added this was not intended to encourage political points of view. Indeed,
freedom of expression is not an Ethiopian cultural value, several editors argued. One journalist said,
"Openness is not easy for Ethiopians. We feel we have to safeguard ourselves." Another one defined
the press-government relationship by suggesting that reporters "should allow government officials to
preview articles to develop confidence in the press and follow tradition. The whole press system has to
come through tradition. A particular Ethiopian newspaper culture has to develop. Adopting the same
system [as the West] might not work."

The jailing of journalists is not a concern for them. As one journalist said, "We're careful . . . We know
what offends the government." Another noted of the Azmari press, "You read what they are writing -- it's
heavy." As these journalists rarely find themselves in jail, their sympathy for those who do is limited. One
editor believed that for the journalists who are jailed, "they create these problems themselves," while
another said that their troubles came because "they interpret everything through politics."

As for the public, they are to be served by having news about their government printed. The
information they are provided will likely not be negative or critical as newspapers noted that the media's
relationship with the public was to work as a "bridge" between government entities and "society." One
story noted that the press should help people "overcome misunderstandings" they might have about the
government. As one journalist noted, "Media should be a forum for people to exchange ideas."

This discourse focused most often on reporters' identity by specifically identifying responsibilities
rather than focusing on other journalism discourses. One publication argued that reporters should
"discharge the professional responsibly of providing the public with complete and timely information."
This discourse also focused on professional improvement. Another publication noted that "journalists are
expected to develop their professional capabilities" because they are "entrusted with the responsibility to
report complete development stories." A story noted that journalists at a recent conference signed
"resolutions" concerning their coverage which they vowed should be improved in certain areas of
coverage.

These editors generally believe in professional values but think that Ethiopian journalism has yet to
achieve these. As one journalist put it, "Starting a paper [in Addis] is one of the simplest things to do" and
thus he thought that many unqualified people work as journalists. Another said that "a journalist's status
is almost nil. They may be feared but they are not respected." Yet another one noted, "Most people are
afraid of journalists. Journalism is not part of the culture." One journalist declared that "We do not have
professional journalists in Ethiopia." This discourse stressed that journalists should be more cooperative
and less competitive between publications. One editor said that the Azmari discourse in particular
"pushed the profession to rivalry. That's not good for the profession."

The Azmari The Azmari discourse continues the African tradition of a polemical, political populist
press. The name Azmari actually comes from several of the journalists who were interviewed for this
project. Historically, the Azmaris in Ethiopia were wandering minstrels who sang the praises of the elites
in exchange for money or other rewards, but they could also provide veiled social and political criticism of
those in power._ As one journalist explained, "The new thing is we write it." The Azmari discourse was
much less introspective about its role in society. It tended to focus on specific incidents, people,
injustices, etc., and was characterized by a strong identification with the readers. When talking about the
relationship with the government, the language was often antagonistic and specific. The country's
president, Meles Zenawi, one paper wrote, is the "enemy of the press." One journalist said that press
freedom means the press can print anything it wants. Another said that press freedom meant "people
have the right to express themselves by writing." One publication put it this way, "The free press is the life
of the people" while a journalist noted that "journalism is human rights work."

These journalists are not afraid to go to jail. As one journalist said, "We don't worry much about the
government," while another noted, "My limit is not prison. They cannot put my freedom in jail." Most of
those who espouse the Azmari discourse have been jailed at least once, and all believe that jailings are
simply a means of government intimidation. A journalist explained, "We cannot expect change if we sit
passively." One publication noted that "Ethiopian journalists are not imprisoned because they incite
violence, as the government claims, but because of their free thinking and writing." As for the public,
the Azmaris tend to express a closer identification with the public than the other discourses. One editor
noted that journalists were the "the vanguard of the people," "the patriots" for whom "Ethiopia comes first,
journalism second." The papers often claimed to speak in the name of the people who, they believe, are
with them in their struggles. As one journalist said, "most of the readers, you know every part of their
heart." One paper wrote that they "stand for the rights and freedom of the people" with the goal to "only to
serve the people. It does not also withhold information from the people as long as it is true." As one
journalist said, "If you have readers, you have to publish it," while later noting that "When the government
does bad, we take it to the people." Another said that "if we make a mistake, the readers do not forgive
us." Several editors articulating the Azmari discourse stopped at one point during their interviews to
proudly pull out handfuls of letters from readers.

The people, it was reported in one publication, were grateful and in solidarity with a press that worked
for their interests. Another publication noted, "The active investigations by the private press have
uncovered diverse injustices and have at least contributed to minimize them." One editor referred to his
networks of correspondents who call in news items as "friends." A journalist explained that "we don't want
to do anything to separate us from the public. We have no secrets from the public."

As for journalist identity, this discourse often views journalists collectively, though not necessarily as a
profession. As one journalist noted, these journalists "have no confidence." They see themselves
collectively fighting against the oppression of the government. As one publication reported, there was a
"fresh round of attacks against the private press" and the government continues its "persecution of private
journalists." While another reported that "Unnamed persons are impostors bent on weakening the private
press" by infiltrating "the ranks of the private press."

Publications tend to document the abuses and slights to other journalists, reporting who has been
picked up by police, jailed, prevented from traveling, and/or detained. One journalist explained, "On holy
days, we send money to imprisoned journalists." Another journalist said, "we exchange news, we
exchange ideas. Informing each other what you saw, what you have on it -- on the serious issues."
Several journalists noted that if they receive information they could not print, they passed it on to other
publications they thought might be interested in the item. Despite shows of solidarity, at times this
discourse criticized its fellow journalists and media workers. The state media was attacked generally in
interviews and in editorial comments such as "the state owned papers want to wipe out the free press.
However they cannot avoid their own sad end." Other times, specific privately owned publications would
be named and criticized or ridiculed for their handling of certain stories.

Conclusion

This study found three distinct discourses concerning journalism in Ethiopia: The Westernizer, which
follows a Western inspired notion of how a commercial media should operate in a democracy; the
Developer, which emphasizes nation building and the collective good of the country; and the Azmari,
which follows the nationalist tradition of a polemical populist press. While it is possible that journalists may
have tried to misrepresent themselves or give what they believed to be the expected answers to
questions, these findings were supported through triangulation of data with newspaper content and
interviews with key informants.

Although it is difficult to make generalizations from such a small group of journalists, nevertheless the
findings are interesting because they suggest that Ethiopia's journalism discourses are similar to those in
other African countries. The models for journalism suggested by these discourses have been found
repeatedly in previous research about the African media. It is possible that the similarities among African
cultures accounts for these findings. It is also possible that Ethiopia's political and social history is actually
not so different from its neighbors. Despite Ethiopia's long history of literacy, this would have extended
only to a small minority of the population, leaving most of the country illiterate. Also, while Ethiopia was
never colonized, it has had a history of interference and influence by the West.

These findings further suggest that no one discourse can account for African media practices and that
this should be taken into account by African governments who tend to treat all publications alike despite
enormous differences as well as by Westerners conducting media training or suggesting media policies
for countries such as Ethiopia. Indeed, most such policy recommendations are based only on the
Westernizer model. Turning to the proposed normative guidelines discussed earlier in this project, we
find that each discourse fulfills some of the guidelines yet fails to live up to many of them.

The Westernizer aims to identify problems in the manner of the watchdog press. In doing so, it
confronts the government with the aim of inducing or encouraging change. Yet this approach becomes
an interaction between the media and the powers that be, often leaving out the public. Because ordinary
people are merely a passive audience for the confrontation, they can become alienated through
frustration that is not connected with action. This leads to the second guideline which advocates giving
ordinary people a voice. Here, the Westernizer simply does not give enough attention to the public voice.
In Ethiopia, some of those articulating this discourse work for English language publications, which they
admit do not reach all the people because of a language barrier. Further, this discourse continues the
Western tradition of subscribing to the ideals of objectivity, a goal that has been described as difficult to
achieve because of traditional African communication values. Finally, the Westernizer values a
professional press corps. Like the recommended guidelines, it stresses the importance of responsibility
and ethics; yet this discourse views those responsibilities as an allegiance to generic, global professional
norms and not so much as a responsibility to the Ethiopian people.

As for the Developer, this discourse does not emphasize identifying problems and, thus, ultimately
does not help the people take any real, meaningful action. Like the Westernizer, it has an abstract,
distant notion of ordinary people who are mainly a passive audience to transmit information to. Some
who articulate the Developer discourse acknowledge that indigenous languages are an important means
of remaining true to Ethiopian cultural values, and within this discourse there is a better understanding
that stories may not be objective in the Western manner. The Developer discourse expresses a need for
responsibility and journalistic ethics but again these are not seen as responsibility to the people, but
rather to ideal professional standards and/or to the nation as a whole.

The Azmari discourse identifies problems and connects these with calls for action. However, while
the Azmari sees itself as a watchdog, it often barks too loudly without enough explanation and alternative,
nonviolent means of creating change. It takes seriously the need to not only give ordinary people a voice
but believes that the media and the people are in a symbiotic relationship. This discourse is more often
articulated in indigenous language publications and rejects much of the Western notions of objectivity and
maintaining a distance from one's subject. The Azmari sees its primary responsibility as being to the
people, but unfortunately it often fails to be guided by a sense of ethics and fairness. The Azmari aims to
transform society but often fails to present an ethically inspired path to change.

Despite its troubling lack of ethics, overall the Azmari represents the closest discourse to fulfilling the
nonWestern media guidelines. It is the most intriguing of the discourses because it is so obviously rejects
the Western models for journalism and also because it seeks to allow civil society a voice. This is a key
problem that has been identified with African mass media, which has tended to centralize communication.
Unlike traditional information processes, print and broadcast media only allowed specially trained
personnel to participate (Mytton, 1983). Whether one admires or loathes the ideas articulated in the
Azmari discourse, it represents a cultural challenge to the accepted, usually Western norms of
journalism. Its connections with its audience means it represents the best chance for actually mobilizing
people to act. These connections and a willingness to sacrifice certain accepted standards of
professionalization to maintain those links (however problematic) makes it the most promising of the
Ethiopian journalism discourses.

References
Ainslie, R. (1966). The press in Africa; communications past and present. New York: Walker
and Company.

Barton, F. (1979). The press of Africa. New York: Africana Publishing Co.

Blake, C. (1997). Democratization: The dominant imperative for national communication

policies in Africa in the 21st century. Gazette, 59(4/5), 255-269.
Bourgault, L. (1993). Press freedom in Africa: A cultural analysis. Journal of Communication
Inquiry, 17(2), 69-92.

Bourgault, L. (1995). Media in sub-Saharan Africa. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Clapman, C. (1969). Haile Selassie's government. New York: Praeger.

Debebe, Y. (1978). A comparative study of the uses and purposes of the media in Ethiopia under
the monarchy and the military government, 1970-1978. Unpublished master's thesis,
University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point.

Eribo, F. & Jong-Ebot, W. (1997). Introduction. In F. Eribo & W. Jong-Ebot (Eds.), Press
freedom and communication in Africa (pp. ix-xx). Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

Fanon, F. (1963/1979). The wretched of the earth. New York: Grove Press.

Fanon, F. (1967). A dying colonialism. New York: Grove Press.

Fanouris, M. & Fanouris, L. (1995). Meskal: An Ethiopian family saga, 1926-1981. Nairobi:
Jacaranda Designs Inc.

Finnegan, W. (1988). Dateline Soweto; travels with black South African reporters. New York:
Harper & Row.

Fordred, L. (1997). Natal cockroaches fly: Khaba Mkhize and communitarian journalism in
Kwa-Zulu-Natal, South Africa. In G. Marcus (Ed.), Cultural producers in perilous
states; editing events, documenting change (pp. 23-54). Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.

Freire, P. (1970). The pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.

Groswiler, P. (1997). Changing perceptions of press freedom in Tanzania. In F. Eribo & W.

Jong-Ebot (Eds.), Press freedom and communication in Africa (pp.101-119). Trenton:
Africa World Press.

Hachten, W. A. (1971) Muffled drums; the news media in Africa. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State
University Press.

Hachten, W. A. (1979, August). The black journalist in South Africa. A paper presented at the
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication conference, Houston.

Hachten, W. A. (1992). The world news prism; changing media of international communication.
Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Heath, C. (1997). Communication and press freedom in Kenya. In F. Eribo & W. Jong-Ebot
(Eds.), Press freedom and communication in Africa (pp. 29-50), Trenton: Africa World
Press.

Kasoma, F. P. (1995). The role of the independent media in Africa's change to democracy.
Media, Culture and Society, 17, 537-555.

Kasoma, F. P. (1997). The independent press in Africa. Gazette, 59(4/5), 295-310.

Kwame, N. (1966). Africa’s new type of journalists: The torch bearers. In W. M. Sulemana-
Sibidow (Ed.), The African journalist (pp. 28-35). Winneba: Kwame Nkrumah
Ideological Institute.

Mazrui, A.A. (1996). Perspective: The quest for modernity and the muse of development. In P.
Altbach & S. M. Hassan (Eds.), The muse of modernity: Essays on culture as
development in Africa (pp. 1-18). Trenton: Africa World Press.

Mohamed, A. (1997, August). Democratization and press freedom in Africa's high context
cultures. A paper presented to the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication, Baltimore.

Mytton, G. (1983). Mass communication in Africa. London: Edward Arnold.

Ogbondah, C. (1997). Communication and democratization in Africa. Gazette, 59(4/5), 271-

294.

Okigbo, C. (1987). Three perspectives of Nigerian journalism. In J. Domatob, A. Jika &

I. Nwosu, (Eds.) Mass media and the African society (pp. 243-250). Nairobi: African
Council on Communication Education.

Pauli, C. (1999, August). Professionalism and African values at The Daily Nation in Kenya. A
paper presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
conference, New Orleans.

Pankhurst, R. (1990). A social history of Ethiopia: The Northern and Central highlands from
early medieval times to the rise of Emperor Tewdros II. Addis Ababa: Institute of
Ethiopian Studies.

Pankhurst, S. (1955). Ethiopia: A cultural history. Essex: Lalibela House.

Seawell, J. (1971). Mass communications in Ethiopia: Blunted instrument of government.

Unpublished master's thesis, University of Texas, Austin.
Ugboajah, F. (1985). Editorial professionalization in the Nigerian mass media. In F. Ugboajah
(Ed.), Mass communication, culture and society in West Africa (pp. 201-210). New
York: Munchen.

Wilcox, D. L. (1975) Mass media in black Africa; philosophy and control. New York:
Praeger Publishers.

1. Ethiopian historian Richard Pankhurst (1990) writes that "Songs adapted to passing events could be
dreaded as much as the lash" and the only way to get them to stop was to give them food or money (p.
262). During the Italian occupation, the Azmari's communication skills were seen as such as threat that
they were ordered exterminated by the occupying forces (S. Pankhurst, 1955).