Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Monica B. Chibita
Abstract
Heading 1
Presentation-UCU Template
Judges, Bishops, Clergy, Professors, partners of the UCU from within and without
Uganda, University Council and Cabinet, UCU Management and staff, Professors and staff from
different Universities, Management and staff of UCU, colleagues from FJMC, former and
current fellow Board Members, Old Boys and Girls from the many schools I have attended and
from Makerere University, Alumni of the University of Iowa and the University of South Africa,
OBs and OGs from all levels, all our partners, our alumni, ladies and gentlemen …Thank you for
Special recognition
In a special way, I would like to recognize and thank Akiiki Zebiah Banura, my mother
and my friend; my husband, My Lord, the Justice Mike Chibita, our children-Benezeri, Semu,
Joshua and Vanessa. Apologies from Maria who could not join us because she had taken another
day off earlier this week to attend Justice Chibita’s swearing in. I take this opportunity to
congratulate Justice Chibita, Justice Tuhaise and Justice Muhanguzi upon their recent
A warm welcome to all my relatives and dear friends from Fort-Portal and from Butaleja,
my brothers and sisters, cousins, friends from all stages and all walks of life. I would also like to
mention a group of special friends called the Ka-chai Group, another group of special friends
called the KBC couples’ Committee, the Kira Cell Group that meets at our home every Monday,
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 4
Pastors and members of Kampala Baptist Church, the Matures Fellowship, Women in
Institutions of Higher Learning affiliated with Higher Education Research Services (HERS-East
Africa), colleagues from all campuses and colleges of Uganda Christian University, members of
the Faculty of Journalism, Media and Communication, the Royals team of UCU and everyone of
you who spared their time to come and celebrate with us today.
I am indebted to my parents, the late Ernest Balya Apuuli, and my mother, Akiiki as well
as the Late Abbooki Charles Mawenu for supporting me through school. I am equally indebted to
the Government of Uganda, The United States Embassy through the Fulbright Programme and
the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Norwegian programme for… (NORHED). I bring
greetings from our partners at NLA College in Norway and the University of KwaZulu Natal.
Finally I thank UCU for organizing such an elegant function today. Thank to the DVCAA, Dean
SRPS and your teams that were behind this. Finally, thank you to the Communications task-
force.
Ambitions
As a young person, sometimes you are not very clear what you want to be when you
grow up. I dreamt first of being a nurse because I liked their uniform; then my Dad rebuked me
and said “why not aim at being a medical doctor?” My interest shifted and I wanted to be a
lawyer because it seemed highly prestigious and intelligent. Then I dreamt of being an altar girl
because I had watched my uncle, now Monsignor Thomas Kisembo, say Mass at our house every
evening when he lived with us briefly. Then I had a brush with real poverty, and felt called to be
a Social Worker. We all go through this. I have no reason to doubt, though, that I ended up in a
good place.
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 5
As you may have heard in the citation, I started working in Higher Education in earnest in 1994.
By that time I had very short stints as a secondary teacher at Kings’ College Buddo (wave) and
as a Youth Worker. I did not start getting purposeful about academic growth, though, until
around 1996. At that time I was a Lecturer [the academic ranks in Uganda are Assistant Lecturer,
Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, Associate Professor, Full Professor]. You may have read this
somewhere, but Dr. Lugalambi and I, full of ambition, each open a file labelled ACADEMIC
GROWTH in capital letters and we vowed to hold each other accountable (thank you, George).
At that time I also got to know then Dr. Edith Natukunda-Togboa who challenged me to begin
writing papers to present at academic conferences. Dr. Abaasi Kiyimba, then my head of
Department in the Literature Department which incubated the Mass Communication Department
at Makerere encouraged me to set publication targets for each year. Dr. Jack Smith challenged
me to read widely, and to keep growing not only mentally, but also spiritually (Thank you Jack).
Much later on, our friend Uncle Imran Ahmed, kept asking, “When are you becoming a
Several other people have played key roles on this journey. My supervisor Prof Pieter
Fourie, my co-supervisor, Prof Murindwa Rutanga, Professor Mary Okwakol, who gave me the
courage to find a balance between family and career development instead of seeing the two as an
either/or proposition. We only had one comprehensive conversation at her home one day, but
that conversation was just what I needed at that my moment. Prof. Tawana Kupe, now Vice-
Chancellor of the University of Pretoria, my friend, Prof Arie de Beer, my colleagues at the East
career helped me mystify fieldwork. Then there are the many partners in research, people I have
co-published with, Prof. Abiodun Salawu who shares my interest in the indigenous language
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 6
media. I want to single out Richard Kibombo with whom I worked on two major studies. There
were many other people along the way, some encouraging, others threatening, others confusing.
I mention all these people, because their input played a role in my journey to where I am
It has been 24 years now and here we are. All I can say is “Mukama Asiimwe Praise the
Lord.”
I recently found out that an inaugural lecture is not the same as a conference paper. In
preparing for this lecture, I learnt that the purpose of an inaugural lecture is not to share specific
research results the way you do at an academic conference, crack a theory or mesmerize people
with complicated words, concepts or formulae. It is rather, to give accountability to the public for
what you have been doing all this time, what you have been thinking, speaking and writing
about, and if possible what your future plans are as an academic and to do this in such a way that
it makes sense to everyone in the audience. This is particularly important if you studied on tax-
It is also important for people outside the walls of the University to understand that when
we do research, we do it not just to make a name or get promotions, but to contribute to the pool
of ideas in the public square, and hopefully make a lasting contribution to the way the world
perceives and does things in our particular field. The inaugural lecture is, therefore, an
opportunity to close the gap between the ivory tower and the public square. Also, the inaugural
lecture is a joyous occasion that allows a University to “launch” its new Professor with a degree
of celebration.
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 7
I started working at the University a few months after the first private radio station
(Radio Sanyu) came on air, and just over a year after the first experiment in private television. It
was exciting to be in the field of communication at that time. Makerere was the only place you
could obtain a degree in Mass Communication. Journalism was not exactly the profession a
mother would recommend to her child, and people were still beginning to make sense of it.
Except for those who worked for the government outlets, there were very few journalists with
more than rudimentary training. The country was coming out of chaotic period and was trying to
recover. Already, there were tensions as the few highly trained journalists like Charles Onyango
Obbo, Robby Muhumuza, David Ouma Balikowa, Peter Mwesige, Kyazze Simwogerere,
Onapito Ekomoloit…fought to raise the bar and to secure more freedom for the media, while the
Documenting the history of our media has fascinated me, and practically every
publication of mine starts with some kind of historicization of the media. Last year, I finally
compressed as much history as I could into an article and published it with the Sage International
Encyclopedia of Mass Media and Society in the spirit of ne jamais pas (may we never forget). I
draw from this article in my historical overview here as well as from my work with the
Broadcasting Council and later Uganda Communications Commission, and my brief experience
in media governance with the Vision Group, and Media Development with the African Centre
Since 1993, the media sector has been liberalized, opening up to private ownership of the
broadcast media and telecommunications. Global trends such as convergence have affected the
media landscape. According to the Ipsos Connect 2017 Uganda Media Landscape report, radio
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 8
by the end of 2017 reached 90% of Uganda’s population. This figure had not changed much by
2019. Television reached 35% and the print media, 15%. In terms of preference, print is now the
least preferred medium. Radio is the most preferred, followed by television, followed by online
media. There are reasons for this pattern, but we will return to those later.
broadcaster, has fallen short of this ideal because of several problems including poor funding,
independence. There seem to be serious efforts to address these challenges. As journalist like to
end their news items, “It remains to be seen whether….” According to the communications
regulator, there were 258 operational radio stations (mostly Frequency Modulation [FM]); and
several free-to-air, terrestrial, digital satellite, and cable TV stations by September 2017. The
numbers for radio were up to 305, and 51 for television by June 2019. These figures are based on
transmitters and therefore include booster stations. Four Pay TV service providers had
countrywide coverage while others had a more limited reach. ?? mobile telephone providers.
The predominant mode of financing for the traditional media is advertising, while
subscription plays a bigger role with the telecommunications companies. In 2015 Uganda
Although the implementation of this conversion has not yet reached 100%, all television service
providers are mandated to go digital and the analog signal has been switched off.
The Uganda Communications Commission further reports that in 2017, the total number
of mobile and fixed telephone lines grew from the previous year’s 23 million to nearly 25. There
was a corresponding decline in fixed line subscriptions. International and roaming traffic have
also grown steadily although WhatsApp, Viber, and Skype, being cheaper, have eaten into these.
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 9
As international data bandwidth in the country has improved, the prices of phones have dropped,
and 3G and 4G coverage has increased, there has been a corresponding increase in internet use,
as well as a drop in the price of data transmission. By the end of December 2019, Internet World
Statistics reported Uganda’s internet penetration at 40.5%, with 2.6 million Facebook users.
These figures will only hold for a while before they change.
telecommunications, have had a significant impact on participation in public debate through the
media in some sectors of the population. Not only is it now easier for journalists to file local
news from anywhere to any newspaper, radio station, or TV station across the country, but
ordinary people are able to participate in programmes and contribute content with the aid of the
phone and the internet. “Traditional” media houses typically have a thread of conversation
running on the social media for any major story, or indeed for any story that the public may be
interested in. This not only boosts numbers for purposes of advertising, it also builds cohesion
among audiences. It further enables ordinary people to participate, with minimum censorship, in
debate on issues that concern them. Besides, such features as Facebook Live enable video live-
streaming. A variety of other mobile apps make TV stations accessible on mobile phones and
various portable platforms. YouTube also gives media owners additional access to large
audiences. All this has made the phenomenon of “citizen journalism” (the creation,
dissemination and analysis of news by the general public) a reality. It has also confused the
Increased access to the internet and the accessibility of mobile phones, however, for the
most part enhances the participation of those who can afford smart phones or bandwidth or what
we call data. Also, these new communication opportunities have a tendency to fragment
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 10
audiences, making it harder for meaningful public opinion on any matter to crystallise. [Recall
birango on radio Uganda]. Now, where do you start? This is a challenge for advertisers who need
a mass audience listening to the same message. It is also a challenge for government, and for
politicians.
including English and Kiswahili, the two official languages. I keep hearing different figures on
this. Despite the historical advantage of English-language use, since the 1990s there has been a
growing emphasis on individual ethnic identity. Hence, relatively few Ugandans speak or
understand Kiswahili and I doubt that there is a single Kiswahili only radio station. There is a
growing number of radio and television stations broadcasting in the various indigenous
languages as well as newspapers in each of the major regional languages of Uganda. Most pay
TV is in English, and most market research so far indicates that there is on aggregate more
minutes spent using English than any of the local languages including Luganda. However, both
the Vision Group and the Nation Media Group, the leading media conglomerates, own a
combination of English and local-language stations because research has shown that particularly
in the Central and Western region, people prefer to receive information in their language.
Media Ownership
My research has also taken me into the area of media ownership because media ownership is a
major factor in creating a diverse communication environment. It is clear that the print media in
Uganda have historically mostly been privately owned. With the liberalisation of the media,
communities joined the business. However, while there are many radio and television stations,
there seems to be little diversity in ownership. Study after study, including the two NEMPS
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 11
studies funded by government shows that government still commands a big stake in the media,
owning 53% of the Vision Group, the largest multi-media entity in the country. The Nation
Media Group also has significant interests in radio, television and the print media.
Several media that are called “community” media are funded and controlled by churches
or non-governmental organisations rather than the communities they purport to serve. The
number of media houses owned by faith-based organisations (mostly Christian and to a limited
extent Muslim) has been growing steadily. There are also intersections between these categories
of owners which further complicate the equation. To understand these, I have relied on the
Apart from the state broadcaster, most media are based in Kampala, the capital city, or
one of the other major towns. However, due to the challenges of surviving in a fragmented
market, there are increasing instances of acquisition of smaller stations based upcountry by
bigger media entities based in Kampala. This raises the issue of how local are our local stations?
Karugire, Isooba and other (media) historians reports that in the early years of Uganda’s
media, entrepreneurs were allowed to set up newspapers without much interference. As the
colonial government observed a growing political consciousness fueled mainly by the indigenous
language press and exposure to different experiences through the Second World War, it started
clamping down on “troublesome” media houses. By independence there was one state
broadcaster owned and controlled by the colonial government, and three newspapers.
Post-independence, the print media came increasingly under state control while
government cemented its influence. This was easy to justify in the interest of unity, national
integration, and development. Following the 1967 political crisis that is commonly known as the
Buganda crisis, fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression, were “suspended” and
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 12
more oppressive media laws enacted. It became easy to punish errant media houses with fines
detention of senior managers and denial of advertising revenue. Parliament was also weakened as
the lines between parties were blurred by political deals. According to Zie Gariyo in his book
titled “The Media, Constitutionalism and Democracy in Uganda”, by the time Obote was
deposed by Idi Amin in 1971, there was little public dissent, and state media had become
mouthpieces of government. Private media had been effectively silenced. Most publications had
The post-independence governments took over the state broadcaster and maintained
absolute control over it. The colonial government had enacted a number of laws, some of which
were adopted wholesale by the post-independence governments. Among these were the Penal
Code Act of 1950, which criminalized causing annoyance to foreign princes and potentates; libel
and defamation; sedition; the publication of false news. There were other laws ostensibly aimed
at maintaining law and order but often used by post-independence governments to curtail the
freedom of media or media personnel perceived to be hostile to the government in power. These
included the Television Licensing Act of 1963; the Press Censorship and Correction Ordinance
of 1964; the Newspaper and Publications Act of 1964; the Official Secrets Act (1964), the
Emergency Powers Act of 1966; and the Public Order and Security Act of 1967. Other
oppressive laws came up during the reign of Idi Amin. The most significant piece of legislation
was notice Number 1 of 1971, which suspended Article 1 of the Constitution—which had
articulated the supremacy of the Constitution. This gave Amin sweeping powers to amend the
constitution at will. The Newspapers and Publications (Amendment) Decree No. 35 of 1972
mandated the minister in charge of information to close down, “in the public interest,” any
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 13
publication, with no prior notice. The second Obote government (1980–1985) continued apects
of this approach to media freedom, expelling foreign journalists and banning newspapers.
media’s fortunes under Museveni, some argue, have been mixed. Tabaire’s article titled the
Media and Public Repression in Uganda: Back to the Future expounds this point. While there has
been significant growth, there have also been instances of closure of media houses, the arrest or
harassment of journalists and the use of other extra-judicial means to regulate the media.
Nevertheless, it should be said that the NRM government, more than any other, has given
Under Museveni, the press has had a degree of editorial independence. However, the
NRM government has been uncompromising with the media when they have published stories
that are deemed to threaten “public order” and “national security.” Needless to say the
journalism fraternity has often questioned the interpretation rendered to the terms “public order
freedom and access to information. Notwithstanding this liberal constitution, however, there are
other laws in place which often have the effect of curtailing the freedoms promised by the
constitution. The print media, for instance, are still mainly governed by the Press and Journalist
Act first enacted in 1995, soon after the liberalization of the broadcast sector. This law
establishes the Media Council as a regulatory body mandated to licence journalists, promote
ethics and professionalism, and provide for the training of journalists. The law gives the minister
in charge of information powers that would make it difficult for the regulatory body to operate
independently. The need for all journalists to be licensed annually by a government body,
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 14
however, is viewed by some as a possible entry point for unwarranted government control.
Although the industry in 2009 established an independent media council in a bid to pre-empt
government interference with their independence, this body has, for a combination of reasons
including inadequate funding and management, not gained much recognition by the media
fraternity.
We know that the broadcast media are currently governed by the Uganda
Communications Act of 2013, which merged the regulatory bodies for broadcasting and
telecommunications. Although this law provides a regulatory framework for the broadcast media
and potentially the internet and mobile phones, it too is premised on the notion of a powerful
minister, who may give directions to the regulatory body with which the latter are bound to
comply.
Ideally, laws emerge out of policy and their provisions should be aligned with the parent
policy. However, the National Broadcasting policy (2004), for instance, came into being years
after the Electronic Media Statute (1996)- which later became The Electronic Media Act Cap
104 (2000). Consequently, many of the policy’s provisions (for instance about public
broadcasting and media ownership) were quite progressive and perhaps more sensitive to the
changes in the media environment than the 1995 and 1996 Laws. Until the law was repealed in
There are also other laws on the landscape directly or indirectly affecting the working of
the media and the newly include the Official Secrets Act 1964, the Anti-Terrorism Act 2002, the
Right of Access to Information Act 2005, the Presidential Elections Act 2005, the Parliamentary
Elections Act 2005, the Referendum and Other Provisions Act 2005, the Copyright and
Neighbouring Rights Act 2006, the Interception of Communication Act 2012, the Public Order
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 15
Management Act 2013, the Uganda Communications Act 2013, and the Anti-Pornography Act
2014.
This array of laws may have some enabling elements, but seen as a whole, may also
potentially be confusing and constraining for journalists as they may have difficulty figuring
out which law will catch them when. While, for instance, for the most part since 1986, the
government of Uganda has given journalists and media organisations considerable latitude to
execute their roles, government has on several occasions arrested journalists, confiscated
equipment, temporarily halted media operations, or jailed media personnel for publication
offenses. Some may say they deserved it, but organisations like HRNJ have been able to
Similarly, while the media in the urban centres enjoy a relatively high degree of freedom,
their upcountry counterparts and especially indigenous-language radio stations, which reach the
majority of ordinary Ugandans, frequently suffer direct interference into their editorial
While many Ugandans say they are aware of the existence of at least one of the newspapers on
the market, a lot fewer report being regular readers of any. The practice of sharing newspapers is
also so rampant that some media houses staple the papers before selling them to compel people
to buy individual copies and hopefully read them. During these sharing sessions, often people are
reading headlines and looking at pictures. This low news reading (or news buying) culture may
be attributed to affordability, low literacy levels, or a poor reading culture. The stapling solution
The tabloid media (like The Red Pepper and The Sun) tend to be more popular than the
mainstream papers, despite public complaints about their ethical quality. In addition, the
indigenous-language newspapers especially in the Central region, are better read than their
English counterparts.
Radio remains the most popular medium, and is accessible to over 90% of the population.
However, Television viewing is growing steadily, particularly with digitization, but is only
accessible to one third of the population. Most people listen to radio in the course of the day
because it allows them to work at the same time and watch more TV towards the evening. Even
though the top two stations as far as advertising revenue is concerned are often English stations,
on average the local-language stations attract more advertising than the English ones.
News is the most popular type of programme, followed by sports. The greatest
consumption of the internet is in Kampala, where the infrastructure is stronger and more people
own mobile phones and can afford so spare some money to buy data. While there does not seems
to be any major gender or economic disparities in the use of the internet, there are age disparities,
the largest number of internet consumers going by the latest survey figures (IPSOS 2019) being
While it may seem like there is of political debate on the internet, research I have
conducted in all the regions of Uganda shows that a majority of Ugandans use the internet for
keeping up social contacts rather than for research, debate, or civic participation. This is
Economically, the communication landscape has also changed. There has been growth
both in mobile money subscription and transactions, which has improved access to financial
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 17
services for many Ugandans. Unfortunately this has also negatively impacted the volume of
Digitisation
But perhaps the most momentous developments on the communication landscape in the
last few years have been around the shift from the old analogue forms of communication to the
digital, and the related changes in what audiences like to consume and how they want it served.
Fourie (2017) argues that the digital communication culture is “a direct consequence of the rapid
society, Dan Laughey (2009) says postmodern society is about “…mass consumerism, mass
literacy, technological innovation, globalization and populism, among other things.” I will not
allow Laughey to detain us. In particular, though, Fourie, in a chapter titled “Social media and
mediated communication in postmodern society” talks about two important and closely related
may be allowed a cliché here, “throw a spanner in the works” for traditional regulation.
Digitisation
convert and use across different media. Such information is also better in quality in the sense that
it does not degenerate when you transfer it from one medium to another. Previously the more
times you dubbed music off a cassette tape, the less clear it sounded. It was a privilege to own
the ORIGINAL. Today you can go back to the original as many time as you want. You also need
much less space to store digitized information, which is why we can store so much more on a
Convergence
Convergence, which comes with digitisation refers to the coming together of what used to
possible to produce, distribute data, information and entertainment and entertainment. Because of
this marriage between broadcasting and telecommunications we are able to enjoy access to vast
databases (electronic libraries or granaries of knowledge). We are able to enjoy pay television
like DSTV and High Definition television (if you can pay, that is). We can built maintain and
terminate relationships across the world through social media (remember how long it took to
connect to a pen-pal? And how you waited to hear back from them? I also remember in the
1990s how long-distance friendship was hard work. We were engaged to get married, and
my fiancé the and I had a disagreement over a philosophical matter just before I left to go
and study in the US. It was so complicated to resolve that little conflict [we depended on
airmail being delivered to your house; if one airmail got lost, communication broke down
you had to start the conversation again; then you were accused of ignoring people or being
non-communicative etc.] Compare that to today’s instant friending and unfriending, blocking,
joining and exiting groups at the click of a button etc. Thanks to the convergence of
technologies, we now also enjoy multimedia services (where the same information in pictures or
words can be transmitted on a variety of platforms like the telephone, television, radio, the
Communication, apart from print and broadcasting. Imagine if we churned out graduates of
photojournalism today, how desperately irrelevant they would be [ media need multi-taskers;
but also amateurs can take great photographs. You would need to have some other skill to be
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 19
employed]. So, just like that, our communication landscape has changed. We can no longer
expect that a media company deals in text, video or audio alone. Most if not all, deal in
journalist should be able to attend this function and go back to his/her editor with a story for the
newspaper, a clip for radio, some footage for television, and a story to be uploaded online.
We now talk about the “new media” to mean all internet-enabled means of
communication. You may have noticed that just as the technology has changed and is able to do
more and more amazing things, key audiences, like the youth have also “moved on.” By their
sheer numbers, the youth have become a factor media that owners, advertisers, church leaders
and yes, politicians cannot ignore. Any media research on audience patterns must pay special
If you check properly, your media consumption habits have changed as well. So have
mine. If I know I can read about the cabinet reshuffle on my phone before I go to bed, why wait
for the paper tomorrow? I may eventually read the paper, but it will be for analysis, profiles etc.
Not just for the facts, because I got them before I went to bed last night.
Today’s audiences know the capacity of the “new” media, so they expect more. They
are demanding, they are impatient, they are unforgiving, and they are bold. Most
importantly they are no longer just consumers of content packaged by a professional in a media
organization, they are producers or co-producers of content themselves in form or blogs, posts,
tweets, and volunteer media content sometimes referred to as citizen journalism. If you want to
know about citizen journalism watch Bukedde and notice how the camera person manages to
capture the moment when a domestic fight breaks out in some remote village. Or just at the
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 20
moment when a witchdoctor’s mayembe are being “ unveiled? Or just as an arsonist sets a house
ablaze, Bukedde is there to bring you the story. This is often because, using modern
communication tools, someone on the scene has tipped a journalist off, or has collaborated with
someone on the scene and in the know who has used their mobile phone to take dramatic video
which they then share or sell to media houses. This story could reach millions of people in
seconds as well. Of course there are unresolved ethical concerns with such journalism. The
accompanying dramatic narrative could be off target, and the damage would be that much more
complicated to undo because of how fast and how the story has moved.
The other major change that has taken place with audiences is that they expect their
media to be interactive. They expect feedback and they expect it now. If it is news, they have
an opinion on it, and they want all their friends to agree or disagree with them. If it is a post they
want you to like it, retweet it, share it, anything. So we have groups, we have chat-rooms, we
have fora and so on and these are all part of the pool of information available to the public.
The changes in audiences I have described (and there are more) are not only a reaction to
technological advancement, but also an outcome of broader societal changes. One may argue that
Ugandan society is still, in many ways, a traditional society. But it seems to me that there is a
social shift that is not limited to the urban areas any more but is fast penetrating the rural areas
The reason these changes interest me is not because people can now have 4 million
Stiglitz argues that without information, “people cannot demand change or accountability. They
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 21
know no better.” In other words, if you do not want people to ask questions, deny them
information.
a polity should then be better equipped to hold their representative accountable. I have
I now invite you to join me on a tour of the last part of this paper which focuses on the
expression in Uganda in a book co-edited with Prof. Abiodun Salawu. In it I tried, like many
scholars before me have tried, to make a connection between the media and democracy.
Defining democracy
There have been many attempts at defining democracy, but there are a few elements that
most scholars seem to agree on. Diamond and Morlino (2005, p.ix-xliii) called them Lowest
decisions;
iv) Democracy means all sound (maybe not frivolous ones ) political proposals
The media, if properly regulated, can play a key role in delivering the above six Lowest
i)being a watchdog over those in power (see also Leibman 2005; Curran 2000 and
Cooper 2006;
ii) Facilitating open political debate on issues of governance (Garnham 1995; Mwesige
iii) setting the agenda for policy-makers, i.e. tipping them off on what to prioritise
because they are in touch with the ordinary people. (Nowak-Teter 2018).
For the media to play these roles optimally, it is important that they are structurally
diverse and permit the expression of diverse political and cultural perspectives. This has not
changed even with the advent of the new media. Structural diversity relates, for instance to
who owns the media, who controls them, how are they distributed, who they reach with
what technical quality etc. It is also important that the media are regulated. Content
diversity is different from content diversity, but the two are inseparable. There may be plenty of
Current regulation debates rotate around not just how the media are regulated, but who
regulates the media: the state, the media industry which includes media owners, journalist
All my research has concerned itself in one or another, with the concepts of media
The modern channels of communication sit at the centre of debates on media freedom,
freedom of expression and democracy. Media freedom in our field is understood by many to
mean freedom of the media to operate without undue interference from government, from big
business or from other powerful forces. This freedom is seen as central to the media’s role in
supporting democracy.
Media freedom
Media freedom is closely linked to media diversity in terms of both content and access.
Media freedom makes it possible for voices which are not all singing one chorus to be heard
in and through the media. It facilitates the co-existence of divergent views. One might think
of an orchestra, but orchestras usually make an effort to harmonise their voices. In the
context of democracy you may not achieve harmony, buy the orchestra should be allowed
i) the media are able to freely reflect the preferences of the population and
ii) populations of divergent preferences have equal access to the media. Media
I must agree with Van Cuilenberg McQuail (2016), therefore, that for us to be able to say
the media, which dominate our communication landscape, are diverse, there should not just be an
back to having one radio station, one TV station, and possibly one newspaper.
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 24
In this regard I have also, together with my former student (Chibita and Mfaume 2011)
written about the fact that perhaps it is no longer a viable project to force all debate into one
unified public sphere but rather allow for multiple and parallel little spheres. Perhaps these little
sphere would eventually identify a few things on which they all agree and stop focusing on their
differences. Perhaps then, would have an idea what the true public interest is.
Freedom of expression
Freedom of expression, which is related to media freedom, on the other hand, goes one
layer deeper than media freedom. It refers to the actual freedom to communicate or exchange
information through a variety of channels. It refers, if you wish, to agency. There may be 303
radio stations, 50 TV stations and many internet-supported channels to enable people to give,
receive or discuss information in Uganda? But to what kind of information is available in the
mainstream media which the majority access? What kind is available only via the new
media which only a few access? What is the quality of that information? How sharable is
that information? To what extent is the average person, or the average journalist able to
Another question I have battled with focusing on the Ugandan context is: does the
political act of liberalizing media space alone mean we now have expanded opportunities for
diversity and freedom of expression (CITE) Cf. (Curran 1991, p.29-30; van Cuilenberg 1999;
Goldsmiths Media Group 2000, p.22, pp. 53-54; Article XIX 2003, p.3; see also White 2008;
Mwesige 2009; Meadows 2013). Does an explosion in technology mean the majority of
Ugandans access and use it for communication of things that actually matter? [Remember
earlier..the majority seem to use social connections, entertainment]. I have also tried to address
the obstacles. In more economically advanced contexts, people may have many communication
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 25
channels, but they have no time, no internet skills; what are the obstacles in our context?
Poverty features prominently (NEMPS 1 and II) and Chibita 2006) (people cannot afford the
devices, the airtime, the data); skill (people do not know how to open a Facebook account, or to
use Twitter or instagram, or to call into a talk-show) [here I also refer you to the work of Peter
Mwesige on talk-shows and democracy under the interesting topic: can you hear me now?] It
might also be that there are cultural obstacles, like age or gender. There may be infrastructural
challenges like no power, no bandwidth etc. Access may also be hindered by lack of a realistic
language policy (a large part of my research has been on this. Chibita 2000, ….). Finally, some
members of the audience may feel defeated by the dominant culture across the available channels
and become “conscientious objectors” and I have met a few of these. When you have issues like
Regulation
So a related area that has been of interest on my journey has been the regulation of
communication, or what we used to call media regulation. In looking at the regulation of the
communication space in Uganda, I started off in 2010 with a journal article titled:
Pp. 85-119. In this article, I examined patterns in government regulation of the media and the
At this stage, even though it was already clear that digital was the future, I did not
examine the regulation of digital spaces. I did this in a later article. My major reflections at this
The broadcast media were more deliberately regulated than the print media. This
has been discussed widely, and attributed to the relatively larger reach of radio and increasingly
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 26
television. As you may know, illiteracy is not an absolute obstacle for radio or television, while it
is for the print media. The paper notes that there has been a lack of consistency and clear
articulation in media/communication policy over the years [In this paper, I point out
examples in the Press and Journalists’ Act 1995 and the Electronic Media Act (since subsumed
under another) where there are contradictions between the Broadcast Council’s Mandate and
UCC’s mandate. Luckily many of these have now been resolved, thanks to convergence]. I also
note ambiguity in language which make enforcement unpredictable; a tendency to bring back
through the back door laws that had been struck off the books by the courts of law, or to
apply them in getting people arrested, even if briefly to make a point; a pattern of continuously
tendency to protect public officials from scrutiny under the guise of protection of privacy (woe
unto you if you lose a defamation case against a senior public official]; and leaving a window
for the executive to intervene in the day-to-day affairs of the media which potentially
undermines the independence of the media. One also notes that media regulation in Uganda
has tended to change with seasons, with regulators seeming to be on heightened alert at peak
political moments. There are seasons when the law on anything is rarely invoked, then there
The argument that runs through my work on freedom of expression (and media freedom)
in Uganda, therefore, is that it is free, but it is not to be taken for granted. Indeed journalists and
lately other media users and producers are once-in-while reminded whence their freedom comes.
In all fairness, though, this may partly be consistent with Article 43 of the constitution, which
I also tackle matters of the matter of regulation in complex situations in another book
This chapter, published in 2011 focuses specifically on popular media. The new media
environment has boosted popular culture and given birth to a wider range of popular media
content. This chapter took an Africa-wide perspective, but had a lot to say about the Ugandan
The major reflections of this chapter were inspired by the popular Luganda phrase:
“abadongo mwefuge”:
In Buganda, when a party warms up, the musicians usually get excited and noisy, and you
will frequently hear the Master of Ceremonies say “abaaye abadongo mwefuge.” [Come on,
musicians, have some self control]. One popular musician, Kafeero, actually composed a song
I have had a fairly close relationship with abadongo (broadly meaning entertainers)
because one of them lived in our house for five or so years. This was a young and upcoming rap
artist named Benezeri. He hated to be called upcoming, by-the-way. Benezeri is now 26, [sorry if
this was a secret] but there were five intense years in his life and ours where the word abadongo
was not a casual word. [Benezeri if you are here, please feel free to wave to the people] Benezeri
has since moved onto other things even though he remains very passionate about music and very
supportive of musicians and the music industry. For details of his work, perhaps the best known
Popular media
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 28
Even though popular media (along with their content, called popular culture) tend to be
taken lightly, they potentially have a powerful political contribution to make. These are media
that represent culture from the “ordinary people” (there are other phrases for this, these days).
This could be music, poetry, drama etc. They are not mainstream. They originally served a
specific group of people with a common culture and understanding. In some ways, popular
media and popular culture tend merge, and to be associated with a form of protest against
mainstream media and the mainstream culture it carries. In this regard I also refer you to
another chapter titled Digital Activism in Uganda where I discuss how people who feel they
cannot adequately express themselves through the mainstream media use the new media to
It used to be that popular culture targeted what some refer to as “omuntu wa wansi”
[atuulira ddala wansi ku ttaka] as opposed to the elite of society. This has changed. Popular
culture can get as sophisticated and as loaded as Shakespeare. Popular media, associated with
popular culture, now include the new media as well. Your mind must be working to find
Popular media bring into public discourse topics and often styles that were previously
considered off and not worthy of the public sphere, or simply uncomfortable for some people
both socially and politically. Kadongokamu is a safe example. Rap is another. You can fill in the
gaps. A lot of music falls into this category, because people more easily summon up the courage
to sing their discontent than speak it out. This is especially true if speaking up is known to have
that is specific to a sub-culture (like boda-boda people have their own slang, sports people their
own etc.). So using culture a person or a group can be systematically included, or excluded.
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 29
A mini public sphere can take shape and begin having their own private conversation. A
group with common interests can be mobilized. It is important to realise that popular culture
represents an important communication channel when the mainstream channels are for
environment when there is so much culture coming in form or music and movies, sometimes
they are the local answer to what they perceive as “invasive” foreign culture.
However, it is also important to realise that popular media can have a dark side, as for
example when they take advantage of their space to be vulgar, or when they are used to incite
Conclusions
I have met very few people who would disagree that even in a free communication
Protection of reputation
That is not the problem. The problem is how do you regulate these things when the
landscape for which current regulation was designed has changes so fundamentally?
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 30
start, in 2017 I did some work with a Kenyan colleague, Dr. Wilson Ugangu. This was a
textbook chapter.
Chibita, M. B. and Ugangu, W. 2017. Social Media Regulation in Africa, in Pieter J. Fourie
(Ed.). 2017. Media Studies: Social (new) Media and Mediated Communication Today.
I treasure this particular piece because the book in which it was published is part of a
series edited by my supervisor (Promoter), Prof. Fourie. It is also exciting because it was
touching on an emerging area whose regulation (or not) continues to baffle many scholars.
Finally, it is in a textbook that my bazukulu might one day use! However, I realise that we still
have a long way to go in finding a solution for the regulation of the current communication
environment in the public interest. Whether we choose to regulate or not to regulate, we risk
complicated
It has become difficult for regulators to identify who or what to regulate. If someone
picks up a damaging story on the internet and sends a tweet about it off his phone. Then
thousands of his/her followers read and retweet it via different devices (phones, tablets, desktop
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 31
computers etc.). Then I pick it up and use it as an illustration in the class. Who is liable for
damaging a reputation? How do you regulate Google which aggregates data and information and
avails it for people to apply as they please? As a newspaper or as a broadcast medium? What
How does the regulator deal with services such as YouTube where a lot of content
business is transacted, but where no one nation can be held liable should something go terribly
wrong and threaten the sovereignty of a nation (example: videos posted by “terrorist” groups)
Print used to be less heavily regulated than radio or television. But then the content was
also easy to distinguish. One was text, the other was video or audio. Does that change now that
many newsrooms are moving towards converged newsrooms and sharing content across what
Today, you are a good journalist if you can tell a story in print, but also insert a hyperlink
to video or audio, or to a completely other source of additional data. How do you extend
regulation from the original silo (print) to everything else that this single journalist touches? How
do you deal with the damage that results from the metamorphosis that this text undergoes as it is
regulated for thinking aloud about their political or religious views or is this within the
boundaries of freedom of expression? [this as you know, is not a hypothetical question any
more]. Is thinking aloud or free expression in a blog or on Twitter as much a concern as thinking
must also change, but must do so without encroaching on those freedoms already guaranteed in
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 32
out constitution. The current media environment calls for innovative regulation, not repression
and not resignation. It is Chinua Achebe who said, citing an endangered species of a bird in
Things Fall Apart, that “since man has learnt to shoot without missing, I have also learnt to fly
without perching.” Many countries in the North have had intense discussions, and have started
changing their approach to regulation to suit the times. In East Africa, Kenya and is
experimenting with a model called co-regulation. This model recognizes that regulators of
communication must work with all stakeholders to reach an understanding, guided by genuine
mutual trust and an understanding of what used to be called the “public interest.”
The Media Council here has started discussing this, and the Uganda Communications
Commission a year or so ago had some dialogue with a number of industry players about how to
regulate in the new environment. Perhaps it is time to begin breaking down the walls between the
regulator and the regulated. It may also be time to intensify dialogue with the people who shape
tomorrow’s media users, as well as researchers to find a model that works for Uganda. While I
do not advocate for totally eliminating state regulation of the communication sector, I am
persuaded that it is time for the state to begin engaging partners to manage the new
communication space more efficiently and in a way that fosters a free and diverse
Current engagements
Future plans
Thank you
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 33
BETWEEN FREEDOM AND REGULATION 34
References
Last Name, F. M. (Year). Article Title. Journal Title, Pages From - To.
Footnotes
Chibita, M. and N. Mfaume (2011). "Language Policy for Radio in Uganda and Tanzania: Public
Sphere or ‘Public Sphericules’?" New Mawazo 10(3): 236-256.
The article discusses language policy in Tanzania and Uganda as it relates to the media.