154 Citizens
The example of Capital FM is just one tiny example of an attempt
to provide a participatory element to mainstream media in the public
sphere. On a macro level, the shifting patterns of the past decade seem
clearly to form as increasingly powerful monopolies and oligarchies
that, as in the case of Infowars, can quickly (although not unproblematically) stifle flows of information that do not serve their economic and
social agendas. Yet, this is not often the experience of users who participate in those platforms: it is only rarely that people find themselves
actively blocked or challenged by the platforms they use. Instead, most
of the time they share stories, request for videos or music to be played,
and contribute information. Looking at another African country, Zimbabwe, Hayes Mabweazara points out just how important social media sites such as Facebook have become in recent years as a primary
starting point to gather information from the public,
125
an experience
shared across every country with the Internet and a mainstream media.
Returning to Capital FM, it is very much a product of a regulatory system formed by the Communications Act (1998) and Malawi ICT Policy
(2003) that both modernised Malawi’s broadcasting and telecommunications industry and subjected it to the Malawi Communications Regulatory Authority (MACRA).
126
Such controls, as was common across
much of Europe (and had long existed in the USA), was largely deregulatory, liberalising radio broadcasting after the collapse of the one-party
state system that had maintained a strict control over all broadcasting
in the country. Capital FM was launched into this new environment not
simply because it was possible to communicate with an audience that
could participate in a multiparty-political system, but because it was
also possible to make money from things such as advertising. The advantages available to Capital were made very clear by Moyo when comparing that station to another, more rural one – Dzimwe Community
Radio – which simply did not have Internet in its newsroom and whose
audience experienced all the technological, economic, and social effects of
a digital divide.
127
The experience afforded by Capital, then, is far from
utopian access to all: the mobility of digital capitalism is limited to the
middle- and high-income classes who can “afford consistent and meaningful use of the Internet and mobile phones”.
128
And yet, in the three
years even since Moyo wrote, African communications, like those across
much of the world, continue to be revolutionised by mobile technologies,
with mobile subscriptions hitting 960 million (out of a population of 1.2
billion) by April 2017.
129
The effects of such participation in communications should not be
overstated: in the aftermath of the so-called Arab Spring, social media was often hailed as a radical new platform for engagement with a
new breed of citizen journalists.
130
In only a brief period of time, such
participation has led to much greater scepticism as a contributory factor in the spread of fake news. Likewise, for many of the users of the
The example of Capital FM is just one tiny example of an attempt
to provide a participatory element to mainstream media in the public
sphere. On a macro level, the shifting patterns of the past decade seem
clearly to form as increasingly powerful monopolies and oligarchies
that, as in the case of Infowars, can quickly (although not unproblematically) stifle flows of information that do not serve their economic and
social agendas. Yet, this is not often the experience of users who participate in those platforms: it is only rarely that people find themselves
actively blocked or challenged by the platforms they use. Instead, most
of the time they share stories, request for videos or music to be played,
and contribute information. Looking at another African country, Zimbabwe, Hayes Mabweazara points out just how important social media sites such as Facebook have become in recent years as a primary
starting point to gather information from the public,
125
an experience
shared across every country with the Internet and a mainstream media.
Returning to Capital FM, it is very much a product of a regulatory system formed by the Communications Act (1998) and Malawi ICT Policy
(2003) that both modernised Malawi’s broadcasting and telecommunications industry and subjected it to the Malawi Communications Regulatory Authority (MACRA).
126
Such controls, as was common across
much of Europe (and had long existed in the USA), was largely deregulatory, liberalising radio broadcasting after the collapse of the one-party
state system that had maintained a strict control over all broadcasting
in the country. Capital FM was launched into this new environment not
simply because it was possible to communicate with an audience that
could participate in a multiparty-political system, but because it was
also possible to make money from things such as advertising. The advantages available to Capital were made very clear by Moyo when comparing that station to another, more rural one – Dzimwe Community
Radio – which simply did not have Internet in its newsroom and whose
audience experienced all the technological, economic, and social effects of
a digital divide.
127
The experience afforded by Capital, then, is far from
utopian access to all: the mobility of digital capitalism is limited to the
middle- and high-income classes who can “afford consistent and meaningful use of the Internet and mobile phones”.
128
And yet, in the three
years even since Moyo wrote, African communications, like those across
much of the world, continue to be revolutionised by mobile technologies,
with mobile subscriptions hitting 960 million (out of a population of 1.2
billion) by April 2017.
129
The effects of such participation in communications should not be
overstated: in the aftermath of the so-called Arab Spring, social media was often hailed as a radical new platform for engagement with a
new breed of citizen journalists.
130
In only a brief period of time, such
participation has led to much greater scepticism as a contributory factor in the spread of fake news. Likewise, for many of the users of the