The
objective of this article is to explore the role of the U.S. media in the
dynamics of reporting conflict in the oil rich Niger Delta where corporate
America has huge oil investments. The mass media is here seen as consisting of a
variety of means, from print media to the latest technology media, through which
information is communicated to a large number of people.
For
proper management of the research however, the print media has been used as
representing the media .To avoid falling into the trap of bias in the process of
analysis, specific attention has been given to language and content analysis of
reportage by two American leading newspapers, with West African offices. These
are: The Washington Post and The New York Times. For the purpose
of clarity, the article focuses on reports on the Niger-Delta from 1998 onward.
The
reports of the selected newspapers on conflict in the region were examined in
the context of existing theories of media and conflict as well as the
journalistic ethics of Objectivity. This exercise which is part of M.A degree
thesis discovers some lapses in the content of the reports and proposes some
media-based initiatives, which the U.S media may adopt to assist in the work of
transforming the conflict in the Niger Delta and manage its consequences.
The
Niger-Delta is a labyrinth of swamp, forest and creeks as well as huge crude oil
deposits. An estimated 2 million barrels of crude oil is produced daily in the
Niger-Delta by the British-Dutch company, Shell, which has been doing oil
exploration in the region since 1969. Other oil companies that extract oil and
gas from the region include, three U.S. based oil firms: Mobil, Chevron and
Texaco
Over
the years however, conflicts between the oil producing communities of the
Niger-Delta and the oil companies on one hand and between these communities and
successive Nigerian governments, have resulted in random violence, human rights
violations, death and mass internment
In
African conflict, the lines of confrontation are most often "drawn over
issues of exclusion, identity, and the frustration of basic needs under
conditions of mis-development and the crumbling hold and legitimacy of an
impoverished state." (Anyadike, 1997) Anyadike goes on to point out that
the conflicts in Africa arise as a result of a global economic system that keeps
Africa locked into a cycle of poverty and domination, aggravating local
conflicts over power and wealth.
This
seems to hold true for the Niger Delta crisis. Studies by Forest, 1993 and
Fraynas, 2001, have shown that the conflicts are as a result of protests against
environmental damage, such as oil spills as well as displeasure with successive
government policies and programs of the oil companies which are believed to be
unjust and inadequate, respectively, to ensure economic development of the oil
producing areas.
From
the 1990s, the violence in the Niger-Delta escalated further and got
international media coverage. Much of this however seem to have focused on the
protests of the Movement for the Survival of Ogoni People (MOSOP), which led to
the withdrawal of the British-Dutch oil company, Shell from some part of the oil
rich Niger Delta in 1993.
The
killing of (MOSOP) leaders including, environmental activist, Ken Saro Wiwa, by
the Nigerian military government in 1995, also got some media attention. Today
there is increasing protest by several ethnic and political groups in the region
and the resultant violence, including the kidnapping expatriate oil workers have
consistently been reported in Newspapers and other media in the United States
MEDIA
AND CONFLICT
There
is not yet a substantial body of scholarship that investigates what role the
media conceivably could play in preventing or ameliorating international or
intra-state conflict. As important, there is little practical information
available to help guide diplomats, mediators, parties to conflict, or
journalists and media managers themselves, on how to minimize the often
contributory role of media in conflict, and how to bring the power of the media
to bear on the tasks of conflict prevention or transformation
Experience
around the world has however shown that journalists, intentionally or otherwise,
are becoming conflict specialists. Much of journalism focuses on conflict, on
describing and analyzing the behavior of the parties involved (Onadipe &
Lord, 1997). The way in which the parties involved are described and
represented, however, can have a profound effect. The media seems to have the
power to encourage conflict and violence, or to assist in conciliation
The
first article from Washington Post that was published within the time- frame
selected for this exercise was the article with the title:
Protest Mount in Oil-Rich Nigerian Delta. Poor Tribal Communities Seek Share of
Billions Pumped From Their Land.
James
Rupert one of the regular writers wrote the article, which was published on
April 8 1998, on Nigerian issues for the papers foreign service section.
This
article, as the title suggests probably sought to show the plight of the members
of the oil producing areas of the Niger Delta. A critical look at the article
for content analysis indicate that the journalist did some background checks
about the history of oil exploration and successive government policies, which
culminated in the 1969 declaration of mineral rights the sole property of
government.
The
article also gave some space to the plights of the members of the oil producing
areas whom he described as “ mostly farmers and
fishermen who have seen little benefits from tens of billion of dollars’ worth
of oil pumped out of their homeland”.
There
are more reports of structural violence in paragraphs eleven where the
journalist wrote: “. The village still lacks
electricity, running water, schools and clinics, and resident say the
development money is being diverted to enrich government officials”
The
article gave instance of direct violence by reporting how “ A special
tribunal widely criticized as unfair” passed death sentence
judgment on Saro Wiwa and others whom he called “dissidents”. The
article has it that when the people protested, “…the government responded
brutally, with sweeping arrest and military raids on villages,” The
article describes these military raids as “ A crackdown ”to get
“suspected dissidents
In one paragraph, the article reports hundreds of death among
the protesting youths armed with “cutlasses and automatic weapons”.
It describes how these protesters “routinely” occupy and close oil
platforms and other facilities. It mentions one of such occupation of a Texaco
offshore oil platform by youths “. Demanding electricity, portable
water and work for their communities”. He noted that such protest “routinely
crimp oil production by 5percent to 10 percent”.
The
journalist quotes a human right and another environmental right activist in the
article. He also quotes two top officials of Shell but did not quote any
official of either Texaco Inc., Mobil Corps. And Chevron Corp, all
American company that he reports. “Have for years been the government’s
business partners in pumping and selling the delta’s oil”
Another
article by James Rupert of Washington Post was the one of October 19,1998
titled: “ Nigerian Protesters Cut Oil Production. Villagers Demand Larger
Share of Wealth” This article
reports how “. Bands of young men…have seized wells, pumping stations and
oil workers, shutting down 30percent of Nigerian petroleum export” The
journalist describes the incident as “the biggest
wave of attacks in years against the multinational companies pumping crude oil
from the region.
The
Washington post article of November 11,1998, by same James Rupert Nigeria
Uprising May Be Grim Preview Of Future” This article vividly describes
living conditions of the members of the oil producing fishermen of Niger Delta
region who are now left with “muddy water and
reeds”.
The first paragraph describes how the “. Steel pod which
normally belches a roaring, yellow flame of gas flare, has becomes silent” .The
article in conclusion reports that the crisis in the region which has led to the
suspension of operations by Shell was going to have adverse effect on the
economic future of the country
On
June 2, 1999, exactly four days after Nigeria became democratic after several
years of military rule, James Rupert again wrote a 897 article in the A section
of the Washington Post. The article reports the latest crisis in the Niger delta
as … “battles which killed about 50 people….
despite pleas for patience from Olusegun Obasanjo”*
On
June 2, 2000,exactly a year after the last story, Washington Post published
another story titled: “World Bank To Vote Tuesday On ‘Nightmare’
African Pipeline” The article written by Nora Boustany* focuses on a
proposed $3.7billion oil pipeline to be put to vote by the World Banks board of
directors on June 6,2000. The article describes the project, which had Mobil
and Chevron as leading consortiums as “controversial”
The
writer of the article quotes Daphne Wysham, of the Washington-based Institute of
Policy Studies extensively: “Wysham,
citing the example of oil company and government collusion in the Niger Delta at
the expense of the local population, said she feared another
"nightmare" in which "the poor are made poorer by corrupt
officials, constant oil spills and deadly joint military and oil company
responses to protests”.
Washington
Post in another 1017 words
article written by Douglas Farah on page A18 of the March 10, 2001 edition,
describes the latest episode in the Niger Delta crisis as “…deadliest
incident of state –sponsored violence since Nigerian abandoned military
rule” The writer of the article reports in paragraph one that: “…anger
and incomprehension still burn in the villagers who are trying to rebuild
their town, which was razed by government troops”. The oil –rich Niger
Delta is described as a “. Restive region”. The writer notes in the
article that: “ a quiet achieved by repressive means can only be temporary”.
The role of any of the multinational oil company in the crisis was not reported.
NEW
YORK TIMES REPORTS
Reports
in the New York Times on the Niger Delta crisis are usually summaries
from wire service of Reuters. The newspaper, which has a West African
Bureau, however published some feature articles in its magazine section in the
period in review.
On
Sunday, January 3, 1999, the paper published a Reuters report titled: Government
Lays Siege To Oil Region In Nigeria. The
report focuses on how government has sent “
troops to reinforce positions in oil-producing Niger Delta, where as many as 19
youths have been reportedly killed while demonstrating for a greater share of
the region's oil wealth”
The report mentions the governments decision to… “ Crack down on unrest,
which threatens state revenues during country's transition to civilian”
One
of the Magazine section stories was the on of
July 4, 1999 titled: "Deep in the Republic of Chevron"
This 98 paragraph story by Norimitsu Onishi, the West African Bureau chief,
was the journalist’s account of life and living in Kula, one of the areas
where Chevron has oil operations. The journalist used the opportunity of
a helicopter visit made possible by Chevron’s superintendent in the
region to report the situation in the Niger Delta from his own perception.
In
the first paragraph, the writer describes the Niger Delta as: “…the most
inhospitable territory on earth” In one paragraph he adds that the region
was the… “Most combustible”
He
reports in the tenth paragraph that the local youths have: “invaded oil
stations, kidnapped workers and committed sabotage against pipelines,”
He adds that many of the youths usually. “Drunk or high on marijuana”
The
article offers historical details about the operation of shell in the region in
the twenty-fifth paragraph. “Since taking over from Gulf Oil in 1984,
Chevron has pumped many billions of dollar’s worth of Nigerian oil.418, 000
barrel a day in 1998. The article adds in paragraph 38 that:
“ …for many years, the oil companies ignored
the squalid conditions in the delta, content to pump oil and get their profit.
But they were forced to change their approach, particularly after 1995”
He
reports in the seventh paragraph how this situation had suddenly given the oil
companies a new role which they seem unprepared for: “.
In the Niger Delta, where men usually focused on finding and extracting
hydrocarbons are forced to act as politicians, diplomats and mediators”
In
paragraphs 30,31and 44respectively,the journalist quotes the Chevron
superintendent and his assistance as describing the local chiefs in the
following words: … “He’s
pig”…He’s just greedy”…They’re all greedy”. .”Most Kula People
are greedy; most chiefs are greedy. They want money all the time. Money, money,
money, money.”
On
July 25, 1999, the New York Times published two letters to the editor.
Both were in response to the Chevron Magazine story. The first letter was
written by David Roodman of the World watch Institute in Washington D.C. The
letter reads in part: “Norrimitsu Onishi’s article represent
Chevron’s point of view in rich details but reduces that of the locals to
caricature”. Williams Edelglass sent the second letter from Cambridge
And
it reads in part: “It struck me as surreal to read of
an American oilman referring to a local as “greedy”, when Chevron is pumping
418,000 barrels a day from Nigeria”.
Although
this was not exhaustively done in this paper, content analysis of reports, as
regards selection of language, topic and framing of issues about the Niger-Delta
crisis, suggest that they are serving the societal purpose of defending the
economic, social and political agenda of the American polity and those
privileged groups, like the oil companies, as suggested in the “Manufacturing
Consent” theory. (Herman and Chomsky, 1998). The selection of words, use
of language and framing of issues in the New York Times magazine story of
July 4,1999 is the strongest testimony to this. Although the paper later
published reactions to the story, proper editing and double-checking of claims
in the report would have been more reassuring to parties in the conflict.
Similarly,
there are instances where the language, selected topics and framing of issues by
these Newspapers in their coverage of the Niger-Delta crisis had the potential
of having the “C.N.N Effect” ”This is the possibility of somewhat
affecting the conduct of U.S diplomacy and foreign policy as well as the
response of American based oil firm to the situation.
This paper could also not exhaustively explore this theory but the choice
of words of Washington Post headlines, seen to aptly capture the story of
deplorable living conditions in the oil producing areas and invites those
concerned to “act” even if not in way of Somalia or Rwanda.
Specifically,
this research paper’s analysis of reports from Both The Washington Post
and New York Times focused on the content of each report, especially the
choice of words and language to examine among other things, how violence was
explained or reported.
The
Newspapers rather than offering a classic ‘blow-by-blow’ account of direct
violence, gave more space to the workings of structural and cultural violence on
the lives of people of the Niger Delta. Both Newspapers reported system based
exploitations and excessive material inequality in the region. The reports from
both Newspapers illuminated the dysfunctional system of military rule and the
ethno-political complexity of Nigeria. They also gave space to the country’s
specific policies on mineral rights, which may be reproducing the violence.
These articles however sometimes used adjectives which may confuse what readers
are led or left to infer about who is who, what should, or is likely to happen
next in the region. Washington Post article of April 8,1998 described
Saro Wiwa, the activist and others killed with him as “ Leaders” and later
in the same article as “Dissidents”.
Also
in the content analysis of the reports on the Niger Delta, this paper focused on
choice of words and language to see if there was news of any effort or ideas to
resolve the conflict. This paper was interested in seeing if there were reports
about peace plans or news of those working to resolve or transform the conflict
in the Niger Delta. Sadly, none of the articles gave any of such report.
In
Journalism, especially in reporting conflict, the issue of “Objectivity” is
usually an important ideal to aim for even if it is impossible to fully attain.
This research paper however discovered that it was used in the reports from the
two leading American Newspapers on the Niger Delta, to have more than one
meaning. The research paper worked on the premise of three different meanings
namely: “reporting as we see it” rather than deliberately distorting what is
seen in the service of another agenda, as the Chevron facilitated visit,
reported in New York Times of July4, 1999, suggest. It could mean,
“just reporting the facts” and not engaging with what journalist can deduce
about the likely consequences of particular reportorial decisions.
This
kind of objectivity, as apparent
in the reports of James Rupert of Washington Post, can amount to a
proposition that the journalist is a neutral, uninvolved, unfeeling mirror in
which reality is reflected, “The way it is”. This can have two damaging
consequences- as evident in studies which
have shown that
Journalists-whether they acknowledge them or not, will always have feelings and
opinions in response to the story they are covering. Trying to ignore or cutting
off those feelings and opinions can lead them to distort, without fully
acknowledging it even to themselves, decisions they make about what to cover and
how to cover it. To be sure, questions of why Washington Post reports did
not quote any American based oil official and how the New York Times
journalist that quoted Chevron officials, made the decision of what to quote and
why he did not quote any of the local chiefs, put question marks on this kind of
objectivity
If
not acknowledged, this bias becomes hidden behind time-honored conventions of
news language, which camouflage opinions as facts. The problem here is that when
journalists present opinion as facts in the choice of words and language, the
reader, cannot identify, inspect or assess the bias; it seeps in to the way the
conflict is constructed.
A
third way in which objectivity has been used in the two Newspapers in their
reports on the Niger Delta conflict is one which suggest that things are the way
they are “because that’s the way they are”. This has the huge disadvantage
of making change seem impossible and cutting down the options for creative
solutions.
Given
these dynamics and the power of the media to affect public situation, as well as
the particularity of the Niger Delta crisis, U.S media in their articles may
give more space to reporting multiple perspectives.
The
conclusion of this research is that U.S media in their reporting of the
situation in the Niger Delta, needs to find a balance between the ethics of
journalism and the limitations imposed by corporate pressures, and build some
responsibility for the consequence of their article, into the process of
commissioning, newsgathering, reporting and editing of articles published.
This media-based strategy will be of great relevance to the work of conflict revolver, because the choice of words use of language and framing of issues by foreign media, on the Niger Delta, surely exert a huge influence on subsequent developments in the oil rich region.
__________
Tokunbo
is a journalist and public affairs commentator. The pioneer Washington, D.C.
bureau Chief of Thisday Newspaper, Tokunbo uses his cross-sectional
experience in media, education and communication to address the issues of
community participation in policy making and the political and civil empowerment
of minorities and minority organizations. He is working on
an M.A in Peace and
Development Studies. He holds a combined degree in English and Education from
the Lagos State University. He also
holds post-graduate certifications in journalism and computer applications.
Widely traveled, Awoshakin is currently based in Maryland where he works as the
Washington D.C. bureau Chief of The Anchor Newspaper.