A few weeks ago, The Star newspaper ran a story that Kenya could lose the Mara ecosystem in 10 years. This chilling prediction was made by a scientist who told the paper that this escalating threat needed the attention of the President. What is disturbing about this story is that the voices of the people at the centre of this potential tragedy are conspicuously missing, despite their population and livestock being discussed as major drivers alongside climate change.
This omission is troubling because for decades, the media has covered conservation stories in Africa in a way that erases Africans. It doesn’t matter the angle. It could be a story promoting tourism, and it’s not uncommon to come across terms like “pristine environment,” which locals interpret as an environment without them, since the targeted audience is only interested in the wild animals and vegetation. And if the story is about conservation, like this one, it often leads with hyperbolic or fatalistic headlines, followed by data but missing the voices intricately connected to the place being discussed.
The conservation sector in Africa is quite complex and marred by allegations of racism. African journalists covering this sector ought to remain alert to these accusations and consider how they frame their stories to avoid perpetuating any colonial undertones, but more importantly, to ensure the media doesn’t lose public trust.
If there is already a debate about how conservation stories are being framed and the public is increasingly voicing this concern, then it behooves the media to at the very least provide alternative arguments—not to undermine the science, but to ensure the inclusion of marginalised voices and their lived experiences, including their conservation practices, for the sake of public debate because some of the indigenous or local community conservation practices predate any conservation scientist.
Interestingly, this wasn’t the only problematic story in this same paper. A few pages later, there’s another story titled, “Marine scientists want area under carbon credits expanded.” Firstly, the headline is misleading; when you read the story, only one scientist – a government chief scientist from Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute, is calling for this expansion. He is reported to be enthusiastic about the carbon credits and their impact on the government’s blue economy initiatives, which have led to the inclusion of ocean climate action in the nationally determined contributions (NDCs). A more apt title should have read “Government scientist wants carbon markets expanded to replicate success” rather than implying that scientists are collectively pushing for it.
Additionally, the story is packed with data. From figures on the tonnes of carbon dioxide captured from the implementation of these projects, to the revenue generated for the government, and the amount of money now available to communities through the development fund. But do you know what is missing? Voices of the coastal communities who are the supposed beneficiaries. It’s hard to imagine that this disconnect is accidental; rather, it reveals a symptom of how conservation narratives in the media too often remove Africans from the picture.
In his book What Are Journalists For? Jay Rosen argues that “Journalists build up the world because their reports about it contain more than ‘information,’ – ‘that superabundant commodity’.” Essentially, Rosen contends that information is a commodity that is plentiful and accessible to anyone, so journalists must go beyond merely restating information. They should provide context and verification, enabling public debate and meaningful engagement with the audience. For Rosen, news at its best should invite citizens to participate, reinforcing the notion that journalism is a public good.
The conservation sector is heavily driven by foreign interests and donors, which explains some of these dynamics, and journalists must remain vigilant by asking important questions like: Who drives the agenda? Who ultimately defines what a thriving Mara looks like? Or who defines what a successful carbon credits project looks like? And that means talking to all stakeholders, especially the concerned community.
