Since I came to Columbia in the fall of 2006, I have only seen a handful of stories about Uganda in the US print media. Not surprisingly, I have seen an AIDS story (Uganda used to be famous or infamous because of this virus); stories about Joseph Kony; and a human interest story about a goat- sponsorship story which supported a needy student till she came to a university in the US.

When Kenyans started killing each other early this year because of disputed election results, there was a bit of

coverage, even in the New York

Times and the Wall Street Journal

. Then the current Zimbabwe crisis took over. This goes to confirm the near legendary accusation that western media is only interested in covering events in Southern Africa, or Africa in particular, when they concern ethnic violence, famine, drought, natural disasters, AIDS and dramatic crises.

In the 1970s and 80s developing countries under UNESCO sponsorship tried to reverse this trend and imbalance by proposing a "New World Information and Communication Order," popularly known as NWICO. Due to heavy Cold War superpower politics at the time, it died in infancy. Despite the abundance and use of modern telecommunication and information technologies in liberalized media industries, the trend persists.

Uganda fully liberalized her airwaves in the 90s. To date, over 140 FM private radio stations and up to 10 television stations are operational in the country. A remarkable difference from what was there before: one radio and television station.

To do business and satisfy their audiences, the television outlets have hooked up with ubiquitous CNN, BBC, Sky, and other international stations. This is because the audience is not just sophisticated, but prefers to watch mainly foreign programs. Isn't this ironic? Most Ugandan elites

still prefer to read The Economist

and many other foreign papers. Because of this, the circulation of the country's two national dailies combined has never risen above 50,000.

Ugandans' love for foreign TV programs is amazing and tells its own story. Take the English Premier Soccer League. When the season kicks off, it provides Ugandans with real entertainment. There is massive support for giant clubs like Manchester United, Arsenal, Chelsea, and Liverpool. When these clubs play, should there be an international match between Uganda and another team, and entrance fee is free, Ugandans would rather pay money to watch English soccer on TV than to go and cheer their own team. Apparently this craze is not just in Uganda.

I was in Yaoundé, Cameroon, for a consultancy in 2004. My stay coincided with a match between Barcelona and AC Milan. It was as if there was a national event in the country as Cameroonians cheered their golden boy Samuel Etoo who played for Barcelona. All other activities were at a standstill.

The other thing is that the Southerners seem to have genuine interest in following what happens in the North. For instance, the current presidential race in the US is causing a lot of excitement in Africa. Senator Obama is a household name there. Every time I talk to someone in East Africa on the phone, the first question is, "Will Obama win?"

Unfortunately the excitement for Obama's candidacy has not gone down well with President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, himself a candidate in the next general elections in 2010. He is quoted in the local press to have complained about the Obama craze, and described such supporters as lazy hunters who wait for an animal to be killed for them to eat the carcass. "Obama, Obama, Obama. He is an American. Why are you looking at him and not yourself?"

If this craze was being lavished on him, he would be basking in glory with glee. Museveni shot his way into power in 1986 and political observers and analysts opine that he wants to rule for life.