• No results found

IV. A cda of The Economist

IV.III 2020 Issue: The African Century

IV.III.I Textual dimension

78

Africa. This notion of the 19th century European nation-state ideology emphasises the superior position of the West.

79

fast-growing middle class with rising spending power; and the growing integration of Africa’s markets,” (Appendix III, article nr. 22). First of all, this writing homogenizes all different countries and regions into one entity, namely Africa. This is not only problematic because the article is about Sub-Saharan Africa and not the African continent, but also because it does not do justice to the local and national differences. Secondly, the phrase presumes that the Western road to development, which has been driven by a fast-growing middle class and the growing integration of markets, is the best and only possible option.

Another way that domestication is performed through language, is by elaborating on the domestic consequences of a foreign development (Joye, 2017: 53): “Though more rich countries seem to be putting up barriers, without migration Europe’s population is forecast to fall by about 10% by 2050,” (Appendix III, article nr. 19). This brings the distant event directly on the doorstep of the audience, thereby creating a sense of urgency (Joye, 2017: 55).

All articles in this 2020 issue use neutral quotation verbs, like “argue”, “say”, and

“ask”, to quote both Western and Sub-Saharan African sources. Western voices are mostly included for their expertise, such as in the following example:

But that underestimates the impact of a big jump in the number of girls who are now going to school across large parts of the continent, argues Wolfgang Lutz, a demographer at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis near Vienna.

(Appendix III, article nr. 18).

However, there are also examples of quotations by people from the West who are residing in the place of the event: “François Lecointre, chief of staff of the French armed forces, Brigadier-General Dagvin Anderson, who commands American special forces in Africa expects a generational, multinational effort,” (Appendix III, article nr. 20). Since Western readership can relate more easily to a compatriot, who is culturally closer, the practice of citing one reduces the emotional proximity to the foreign event (Joye, 2017: 55). Local voices are also quoted: either as experts or as people directly affected by the issue at stake. However, there is a considerably smaller amount of local experts that is quoted as compared to Western experts. What is also interesting is the fact that the local experts that are quoted, do have some connection with the West, e.g.: “Kwami Williams, a Ghanaian-born American who studied aerospace engineering at mit” and “Or Ikenna Nzewi, a Nigerian-American who studied computer science at Yale,” (Appendix III, article nr. 19). The question is why the journalists

80

explicitly mention that these sources have studied in the United States. It leaves the reader wondering whether this gives them more credibility.

In terms of the future perspective that is offered in the 2020 special issue, six out of seven articles of this issue show signs of optimism. It is important to mention that, in most articles, this positive attitude towards the future of Sub-Saharan Africa is not based on real, detectable development. Instead, it takes the shape of future promises and expected development, as is visible in the following example:

After centuries on the periphery, Africa is set to play a much more important role in global affairs, the global economy and the global imagination. Asia’s economic and population booms may continue to dominate the first part of this century, but Africa’s weight will grow in the second half. (Appendix III, article nr. 17)

The 2020 special issue also contains articles in which the journalists emphasize that certain requirements need to be met to reach future progress, e.g.: “But if accompanied by matching growth in GDP, economies such as Nigeria could overtake France or Germany in size (adjusted for purchasing power), according to PWC, an accounting firm,” (Appendix III, article nr. 17). In another article, The Economist makes a clear distinction between the future expectations of different Sub-Saharan countries: “Not all countries are in this virtuous cycle.

But for those that are, the differences are striking. Kenyan women, for instance, are not just much richer than their cousins in Tanzania, they also each have 1.4 fewer children,”

(Appendix III, article nr. 23). There is also one article that states that the situation is not as positive as certain numbers assume:

In the 1970s little more than half of children in sub-Saharan Africa were enrolled in primary school. That share has shot up to almost 100%. The statistic is slightly misleading, since the percentage of children regularly attending schools is lower, though improving. (Appendix III, article nr. 18)

What is also interesting about this paragraph is the reference to “Sub-Saharan Africa”, while in other parts of the article the journalists simply refer to “Africa”. This again, shows how the label “Africa” is racialized: it refers to Sub-Saharan, black Africa and ignores the north of the continent and its inhabitants. In general, this ethnic framing practice returns in each article and headline of the 2020 special issue. In fact, each headline contains the word

81

“Africa”, while the articles themselves all speak solely about Sub-Saharan Africa. Another example shows how the labels “African” and “Sub-Saharan African” are even used intertwined:

Even so, African migrants generate a disproportionate share of headlines in rich countries.

This is partly because nearly half of those who died crossing the Mediterranean during the height of the “migrant crisis” of 2015 were sub-Saharan Africans. (Appendix III, article nr. 19)

The racial ethnic frames mentioned above also contain the homogenization of Africa into one country. In the following example this homogenization takes shape by presenting Africa as one entity with characteristics that can be ascribed to Africa as a whole: “Africa is particularly vulnerable, in part because it is already itself and it will have to vastly increase yields and productivity if it is to put food on the plates of a fast-growing population, even without climate change,” (Appendix III, article nr. 21). Also, the socio-cultural differences between the different Sub-Saharan African peoples are ignored: “Passing through the gate leading into the Hawassa industrial park feels a bit like crossing a boundary between Africa’s past and a vision of its future,” (Appendix III, article nr. 22). However, the journalists of The Economist do seem to be aware of the homogenization of Africa and do in fact, raise awareness to it in the last article of this particular issue: “Many Africans rightly complain that outsiders carelessly lump together its 54 different countries and talk of it as a place that rises or falls as one. Such generalisations are not just lazy but also obscure more than they clarify,”

(Appendix III, article nr. 23).

In terms of the ranking framework, Sub-Saharan Africans are presented as inferior as opposed to others. When referring to African students who studied abroad, The Economist writes the following: “This means that large numbers of bright youngsters are getting exposed to societies that are often more democratic, less corrupt and with more productive business environments than those they grew up in,” (Appendix III, article nr. 19). This example clearly shows that elsewhere, the political and economic situation is better and more developed than at home in Sub-Saharan Africa. Another article clearly refers to the underdevelopment of Africa, which has not gone through the same industrialization process as the West and the rest of the world: “The risk is that this “premature de-industrialisation” could leave many African countries unable to produce the good jobs and economic growth needed to catch up with the rich world,” (Appendix III, article nr. 22).

82

The use of an inferior ranking frame also becomes clear from the fact that The Economist proposes how Africa should develop, as if the latter is a small child that cannot take care of itself: “Better urban planning with denser housing instead of sprawling slums, with wider roads and public transport, would all go a long way to making cities more productive,” (Appendix III, article nr. 18). Another example is the following headline:

“African countries must get smarter with their agriculture,” (Appendix III, article nr. 21). This phrase does not only tell what Africans should do, but also presumes that Africans are not smart enough.