REAL 'AFFIRMATIVE ACTION'...

RACISM...

AND CENSORSHIP...

AT WORK!

RACISM...

AND CENSORSHIP...

AT WORK!

INTERROGATING THE BLOGOSPHERE (IV)

SO, WHAT’S THE WORD ON SOUTH AFRICA?

Gil Scott Heron put the question to the world, in what seems now a long while ago, in relation to Johannesburg. I started asking it myself in the last few days as I got news of what has been reported as the most talked about story in South Africa in recent times.
In my search for answers I found this article, which to me seems a good example of “as close as the (good) media can get to objectivity”, whatever that is…

Probably, mainstream media, in this case AFP, at its best!

No, not simply because they seem to be “sympathetic” to the “black cause”, whatever that is, if that’s what you’re thinking… But because they approach the subject from different perspectives, using various illustrative cases and, while highlighting the case of the humiliating video in question, also mention the case where white journalists were barred from a meeting between black journalists and Jacob Zuma, and all they have as “opinion”, placed against a brief, yet accurate, historical background, is gathered from relevant voices in the country on the issues at stake.

Now, I must say that my praise for this particular article is not completely unrelated to the fact that I couldn’t find a single word on the video story in my “much loved GVO”… Why was it? Where have all the bloggers always so keen on pointing the finger at, or forcefully acting upon, what they perceive, rightly or wrongly, as “black racism” been in the last few days? Or was it GVO that didn’t notice their presumable posts on the issue?

SO, WHAT’S THE WORD ON SOUTH AFRICA?

Gil Scott Heron put the question to the world, in what seems now a long while ago, in relation to Johannesburg. I started asking it myself in the last few days as I got news of what has been reported as the most talked about story in South Africa in recent times.
In my search for answers I found this article, which to me seems a good example of “as close as the (good) media can get to objectivity”, whatever that is…

Probably, mainstream media, in this case AFP, at its best!

No, not simply because they seem to be “sympathetic” to the “black cause”, whatever that is, if that’s what you’re thinking… But because they approach the subject from different perspectives, using various illustrative cases and, while highlighting the case of the humiliating video in question, also mention the case where white journalists were barred from a meeting between black journalists and Jacob Zuma, and all they have as “opinion”, placed against a brief, yet accurate, historical background, is gathered from relevant voices in the country on the issues at stake.

Now, I must say that my praise for this particular article is not completely unrelated to the fact that I couldn’t find a single word on the video story in my “much loved GVO”… Why was it? Where have all the bloggers always so keen on pointing the finger at, or forcefully acting upon, what they perceive, rightly or wrongly, as “black racism” been in the last few days? Or was it GVO that didn’t notice their presumable posts on the issue?

JOAQUIM PINTO DE ANDRADE E GENTIL VIANA (R.I.P.)

[N.B.: Nao era esta, exactamente, a homenagem que me merecem e que planeara em memoria desses dois Mais Velhos. No entanto, tendo sido confrontada com dois blog posts, um deles reproduzido no GVO e onde claramente se confunde a figura de Joaquim com a de Vicente, ou de Justino, Pinto de Andrade... e outro onde este texto da Lusa e' reproduzido sem qualquer indicacao da fonte citada... achei por bem publica-lo aqui.]


Lisboa, 23 Fev (Lusa) - Joaquim Pinto de Andrade e Gentil Ferreira Viana, dois "históricos" do MPLA e protagonistas do movimento dissidente Revolta Activa, morreram hoje, em Luanda e Lisboa, respectivamente. Joaquim Pinto de Andrade, nascido em 1926, morreu vítima de doença prolongada, na sua residência do Bairro Azul, em Luanda, confirmou à Lusa fonte próxima da família.

Gentil Viana, 72 anos, que residia há mais de três décadas em Portugal, faleceu também vítima de doença prolongada, em Lisboa, onde se encontrava hospitalizado, disse à Lusa Vitor Ramalho, amigo do falecido. Os dois "históricos" hoje falecidos estiveram entre os impulsionadores da tendência política Revolta Activa, no seio do MPLA, em que participaram também o irmão de Joaquim Pinto de Andrade, Mário - primeiro presidente do MPLA -, Carlos "Liceu" Vieira Dias, Maria do Céu Carmo Reis e outros intelectuais angolanos.

Esta tendência contestatária da liderança de Agostinho Neto procurava afirmar-se como "independente, plural, não engajada com nenhum dos blocos" em disputa em Angola no pós independência, segundo disse à Lusa Vítor Ramalho, que partilhou durante muitos anos um escritório de advogados com Gentil Viana. Com a Revolta Activa afirmava-se então no MPLA a "Revolta de Leste", liderada por Daniel Chipenda, além do grupo leal a Neto. Em 1975, juntamente com muitos outros intelectuais do MPLA, Gentil Viana é preso e só dois anos depois conseguiria a liberdade.

Numa luta na prisão foi ferido com gravidade num olho, tendo ficado praticamente cego de uma vista. Para a sua libertação, disse à Lusa Vítor Ramalho, intercedeu pessoalmente o general Tito, o líder da então Jugoslávia, país que o acolheu logo após a saída da prisão. Questionado sobre o seu destino de eleição, Viana acaba por se decidir por Portugal, onde se tinha licenciado em Direito nos anos 60, e mais tarde fugido - com outros intelectuais como o moçambicano Joaquim Chissano e o escritor Pepetela - para iniciar um longo périplo que o levaria a Paris, Gana, Congo Brazzaville, Argélia, China, e mais tarde para a guerrilha em Angola.

Divorciado de uma professoria universitária moçambicana residente em Portugal, Gentil Ferreira Viana foi pai de cinco filhos, dois dos quais já falecidos e os outros três residentes em Angola. Neto de um português, Viana voltou a Angola por duas vezes, depois de se estabelecer em Lisboa em 1977 - a primeira logo após os Acordos de Bicesse (1991) e a última há poucos anos. Conta Vítor Ramalho que Viana voltou das viagens a Angola "amargurado pela sua terra", mas "sem guardar ressentimentos a quem quer que fosse".

"Era um conciliador, um homem marcante para quem o conheceu bem. É preciso saber honrar este homem que foi precursor do que há de mais profundo na política. Era respeitado por todas as sensibilidades, um grande amigo de Portugal e dos portugueses", afirma Ramalho. O corpo de Gentil Viana ficará em câmara ardente na Casa de Angola, em Lisboa, a partir das 16:00 de domingo.

Na segunda-feira, o féretro segue para Luanda, cidade natal do político angolano, onde será sepultado. A vida de Gentil Viana cruzou-se, em vários momentos, com a de Joaquim Pinto de Andrade. O seu pai - Frederico Viana, filho de um português - e Pinto de Andrade "pai" foram ambos fundadores da Liga Nacional Africana, movimento político que nos anos 40 e 50 se afirmou como impulsionador da identidade africana nas então colónias.

Também pelos calabouços angolanos passou Joaquim Pinto de Andrade, presidente honorário do MPLA, que se manteve até há pouco tempo activo na política angolana. Esteve ligado ao "fugaz" Partido Reformador Democrático (PRD), que obteve um resultado pouco expressivo nas eleições de 1992. Foi durante umas férias em Portugal, em meados dos anos 90, que adoeceu com gravidade, tendo desde então passado longos períodos hospitalizado. Ainda jovem, abraçou o sacerdócio católico, que abandonou mais tarde para se casar com Vitória Almeida e Sousa, médica pediatra; tiveram dois filhos. Como contou à Lusa em Luanda Jerónimo Belo, amigo de Pinto de Andrade, morreu hoje na capital angolana "um grande nacionalista angolano". PDF/RB. Lusa/Fim

[N.B.: Nao era esta, exactamente, a homenagem que me merecem e que planeara em memoria desses dois Mais Velhos. No entanto, tendo sido confrontada com dois blog posts, um deles reproduzido no GVO e onde claramente se confunde a figura de Joaquim com a de Vicente, ou de Justino, Pinto de Andrade... e outro onde este texto da Lusa e' reproduzido sem qualquer indicacao da fonte citada... achei por bem publica-lo aqui.]


Lisboa, 23 Fev (Lusa) - Joaquim Pinto de Andrade e Gentil Ferreira Viana, dois "históricos" do MPLA e protagonistas do movimento dissidente Revolta Activa, morreram hoje, em Luanda e Lisboa, respectivamente. Joaquim Pinto de Andrade, nascido em 1926, morreu vítima de doença prolongada, na sua residência do Bairro Azul, em Luanda, confirmou à Lusa fonte próxima da família.

Gentil Viana, 72 anos, que residia há mais de três décadas em Portugal, faleceu também vítima de doença prolongada, em Lisboa, onde se encontrava hospitalizado, disse à Lusa Vitor Ramalho, amigo do falecido. Os dois "históricos" hoje falecidos estiveram entre os impulsionadores da tendência política Revolta Activa, no seio do MPLA, em que participaram também o irmão de Joaquim Pinto de Andrade, Mário - primeiro presidente do MPLA -, Carlos "Liceu" Vieira Dias, Maria do Céu Carmo Reis e outros intelectuais angolanos.

Esta tendência contestatária da liderança de Agostinho Neto procurava afirmar-se como "independente, plural, não engajada com nenhum dos blocos" em disputa em Angola no pós independência, segundo disse à Lusa Vítor Ramalho, que partilhou durante muitos anos um escritório de advogados com Gentil Viana. Com a Revolta Activa afirmava-se então no MPLA a "Revolta de Leste", liderada por Daniel Chipenda, além do grupo leal a Neto. Em 1975, juntamente com muitos outros intelectuais do MPLA, Gentil Viana é preso e só dois anos depois conseguiria a liberdade.

Numa luta na prisão foi ferido com gravidade num olho, tendo ficado praticamente cego de uma vista. Para a sua libertação, disse à Lusa Vítor Ramalho, intercedeu pessoalmente o general Tito, o líder da então Jugoslávia, país que o acolheu logo após a saída da prisão. Questionado sobre o seu destino de eleição, Viana acaba por se decidir por Portugal, onde se tinha licenciado em Direito nos anos 60, e mais tarde fugido - com outros intelectuais como o moçambicano Joaquim Chissano e o escritor Pepetela - para iniciar um longo périplo que o levaria a Paris, Gana, Congo Brazzaville, Argélia, China, e mais tarde para a guerrilha em Angola.

Divorciado de uma professoria universitária moçambicana residente em Portugal, Gentil Ferreira Viana foi pai de cinco filhos, dois dos quais já falecidos e os outros três residentes em Angola. Neto de um português, Viana voltou a Angola por duas vezes, depois de se estabelecer em Lisboa em 1977 - a primeira logo após os Acordos de Bicesse (1991) e a última há poucos anos. Conta Vítor Ramalho que Viana voltou das viagens a Angola "amargurado pela sua terra", mas "sem guardar ressentimentos a quem quer que fosse".

"Era um conciliador, um homem marcante para quem o conheceu bem. É preciso saber honrar este homem que foi precursor do que há de mais profundo na política. Era respeitado por todas as sensibilidades, um grande amigo de Portugal e dos portugueses", afirma Ramalho. O corpo de Gentil Viana ficará em câmara ardente na Casa de Angola, em Lisboa, a partir das 16:00 de domingo.

Na segunda-feira, o féretro segue para Luanda, cidade natal do político angolano, onde será sepultado. A vida de Gentil Viana cruzou-se, em vários momentos, com a de Joaquim Pinto de Andrade. O seu pai - Frederico Viana, filho de um português - e Pinto de Andrade "pai" foram ambos fundadores da Liga Nacional Africana, movimento político que nos anos 40 e 50 se afirmou como impulsionador da identidade africana nas então colónias.

Também pelos calabouços angolanos passou Joaquim Pinto de Andrade, presidente honorário do MPLA, que se manteve até há pouco tempo activo na política angolana. Esteve ligado ao "fugaz" Partido Reformador Democrático (PRD), que obteve um resultado pouco expressivo nas eleições de 1992. Foi durante umas férias em Portugal, em meados dos anos 90, que adoeceu com gravidade, tendo desde então passado longos períodos hospitalizado. Ainda jovem, abraçou o sacerdócio católico, que abandonou mais tarde para se casar com Vitória Almeida e Sousa, médica pediatra; tiveram dois filhos. Como contou à Lusa em Luanda Jerónimo Belo, amigo de Pinto de Andrade, morreu hoje na capital angolana "um grande nacionalista angolano". PDF/RB. Lusa/Fim

LOCAL VOICES OFFLINE (8)

Things someone, somewhere in the world, was talking about but you probably weren’t listening…

THE GREAT SHE-ELEPHANT



The row over GCHQ (Government Communications Headquarters) led to a full-scale, angry debate in the Commons, in which the Shadow Foreign Secretary, DENIS HEALEY, gave one of his best performances, attacking Mrs. Thatcher as the real author of the change, pulling Sir Geoffrey’s strings. He said Sir Geoffrey had made himself the laughing stock of the world, and that he had kicked constructive Trade Union leaders in the teeth. (27/2/84)

Things someone, somewhere in the world, was talking about but you probably weren’t listening…

THE GREAT SHE-ELEPHANT



The row over GCHQ (Government Communications Headquarters) led to a full-scale, angry debate in the Commons, in which the Shadow Foreign Secretary, DENIS HEALEY, gave one of his best performances, attacking Mrs. Thatcher as the real author of the change, pulling Sir Geoffrey’s strings. He said Sir Geoffrey had made himself the laughing stock of the world, and that he had kicked constructive Trade Union leaders in the teeth. (27/2/84)

INTERROGATING THE BLOGOSPHERE (III)

I swear to anyone remotely interested in this: there’s nothing I would like more at the moment than a quiet and relaxed weekend, or anything I could have wished more than a safe and trouble-free journey in the blogosphere, throughout the rest of this year, particularly taking into account what I went through all last year…

But, as I was waiting to see my reply to a comment I found on GVO (reproduced here) appear there, I just took a look at that site again and found this thing.

Now, as I was talking here about “objectivity/subjectivity”, with Sokari, there were always at least two words on the back of my mind I felt were missing in our conversation, and those were “bias” and “manipulation” (of opinion)!
Now, why would it be that the selected paragraph from that article would be the one appeared on GVO and not any of these:

“O Brasil é dos países mais ricos e diversos culturalmente que já vi, e ao mesmo tempo o pais mais racista que já vi. Angola é dos países mais ricos e diversificados que África possui e ainda assim sofre severamente de racismo. Os critérios de entrada na discoteca, são dos que mais gosto para exemplificar os estereótipos, mesmo porque já fui vitima deste exemplo varias vezes. Os estrangeiros(brancos/mulatos) têm dinheiro.”

“Motivos por ser um pais racista? São dos mais diversos, sendo a colonização para mim o "motivo base" do racismo em Angola, e em todos países do Mundo. Todos países do mundo? Sim, todos os países do mundo! A colonização não resultou só na exploração e ocupação de um povo, mas também resultou na "migração" desse povo durante anos e anos. Os que foram ocupados e explorados fora misturados como é o caso de Angola. Misturados coisa que não aconteceu muitos com os outros países colonizadores, sendo Portugal o mais "mente aberta" quando se tratava de "conhecer" melhor o povo ocupado. E os que colonizavam e que são muitos deles conhecidos como países do primeiro mundo hoje em dia, não estavam contentes por terem sobre sua guarda os povos explorados, portanto resolveram começar a "trazê-los" para os seus países "super-desenvolvidos" onde o ser humano não era um "selvagem",mas sim um "civilizado". Isto tudo mesmo com o fim da escravatura e da colonização deixou marcas e vestígios enormes na nossa sociedade.”

“Hum..e já me esquecia, a resposta que eu dei a senhora que tratava do bilhete foi : EU SOU ANGOLANO!! e ela deu-me um bom xoxo à moda da terra e escreveu RACA: MISTA. Paz,”

Of course, 'simple-minded' people would say: well, because the “editor” didn’t even had the time to read the full article, let alone “think about it”, so she just copied and pasted the first paragraph of ... well, the last part of the article, why should it be the first?

And why did she select that particular article and not, say, this one? Or this one, or the clip on this one? Or the comments on this one?
Well, my dear, the 'simpleton' would say, because she has far more interesting things to do, don't you think?”…

Sorry, English readers only, but if you want a translation of the excerpts I transcribed here, or of the full article in question, you may wish to ask the Portuguese-language team at GVO for it (I’m sorry, but I am not paid for that, never have been, and I’m not sure the same can be said about them…), or use the available online translation devices if you please.*

Enjoy your weekend anyway!

***

*P.S.: I might just add, for the benefit of a better understanding of this issue, that the claim that the mention of ‘races’ in Angolan identity cards (as in here, where mine is pictured) is "an act of racism against them” is a pet cause of the white and mixed-race minorities in the country (as is, by the way, their hatred for the figure of Queen Nzinga Mbandi – whose picture I’m currently using as this blog’s logo – and for her statue in one of the two main squares in the capital city, Luanda).

As with any rule, there are, of course, exceptions, as exemplified by a recent statement by the widow of the first Angolan President (here) who says that “some people get very offended by that, but I am not sure that it is an offense.”

I swear to anyone remotely interested in this: there’s nothing I would like more at the moment than a quiet and relaxed weekend, or anything I could have wished more than a safe and trouble-free journey in the blogosphere, throughout the rest of this year, particularly taking into account what I went through all last year…

But, as I was waiting to see my reply to a comment I found on GVO (reproduced here) appear there, I just took a look at that site again and found this thing.

Now, as I was talking here about “objectivity/subjectivity”, with Sokari, there were always at least two words on the back of my mind I felt were missing in our conversation, and those were “bias” and “manipulation” (of opinion)!
Now, why would it be that the selected paragraph from that article would be the one appeared on GVO and not any of these:

“O Brasil é dos países mais ricos e diversos culturalmente que já vi, e ao mesmo tempo o pais mais racista que já vi. Angola é dos países mais ricos e diversificados que África possui e ainda assim sofre severamente de racismo. Os critérios de entrada na discoteca, são dos que mais gosto para exemplificar os estereótipos, mesmo porque já fui vitima deste exemplo varias vezes. Os estrangeiros(brancos/mulatos) têm dinheiro.”

“Motivos por ser um pais racista? São dos mais diversos, sendo a colonização para mim o "motivo base" do racismo em Angola, e em todos países do Mundo. Todos países do mundo? Sim, todos os países do mundo! A colonização não resultou só na exploração e ocupação de um povo, mas também resultou na "migração" desse povo durante anos e anos. Os que foram ocupados e explorados fora misturados como é o caso de Angola. Misturados coisa que não aconteceu muitos com os outros países colonizadores, sendo Portugal o mais "mente aberta" quando se tratava de "conhecer" melhor o povo ocupado. E os que colonizavam e que são muitos deles conhecidos como países do primeiro mundo hoje em dia, não estavam contentes por terem sobre sua guarda os povos explorados, portanto resolveram começar a "trazê-los" para os seus países "super-desenvolvidos" onde o ser humano não era um "selvagem",mas sim um "civilizado". Isto tudo mesmo com o fim da escravatura e da colonização deixou marcas e vestígios enormes na nossa sociedade.”

“Hum..e já me esquecia, a resposta que eu dei a senhora que tratava do bilhete foi : EU SOU ANGOLANO!! e ela deu-me um bom xoxo à moda da terra e escreveu RACA: MISTA. Paz,”

Of course, 'simple-minded' people would say: well, because the “editor” didn’t even had the time to read the full article, let alone “think about it”, so she just copied and pasted the first paragraph of ... well, the last part of the article, why should it be the first?

And why did she select that particular article and not, say, this one? Or this one, or the clip on this one? Or the comments on this one?
Well, my dear, the 'simpleton' would say, because she has far more interesting things to do, don't you think?”…

Sorry, English readers only, but if you want a translation of the excerpts I transcribed here, or of the full article in question, you may wish to ask the Portuguese-language team at GVO for it (I’m sorry, but I am not paid for that, never have been, and I’m not sure the same can be said about them…), or use the available online translation devices if you please.*

Enjoy your weekend anyway!

***

*P.S.: I might just add, for the benefit of a better understanding of this issue, that the claim that the mention of ‘races’ in Angolan identity cards (as in here, where mine is pictured) is "an act of racism against them” is a pet cause of the white and mixed-race minorities in the country (as is, by the way, their hatred for the figure of Queen Nzinga Mbandi – whose picture I’m currently using as this blog’s logo – and for her statue in one of the two main squares in the capital city, Luanda).

As with any rule, there are, of course, exceptions, as exemplified by a recent statement by the widow of the first Angolan President (here) who says that “some people get very offended by that, but I am not sure that it is an offense.”

INTERROGATING THE BLOGOSPHERE (II)

In the previous post, I raised, among others, the following questions:

Firstly, what is exactly the “mainstream media”? Does it include the same type of outlets in New York, Lisbon, Luanda, Boston, Porto, Brazilia, Maputo, London, Praia, Vila Nova de Gaia, Rio, Lubango or Dili? Secondly, to what extent can a blogger based in Portugal, USA, UK or Cabo Verde accurately reflect the voices of communities and individual citizens in N’Dalatando, Quelimane or Principe, whose concerns might not be heard online? Can such a blogger in any case reflect them better than another one based closer to those communities, unless he visits them regularly or has close family, friendship, or professional ties with them? Thirdly, who gets to determine, and under whose criteria, which are “the most interesting conversations and perspectives emerging from citizens’ media around the world”, as per the GVO “Primary Goals”?

Trying to find some answers, I took a close look at the GVO coverage of “Portuguese-speaking African countries” in the last six months*:

The most striking observation from this graph is that OC appears not only, as we have seen before, as the “undisputed champion” of GVO reporting about the “Angolan blogosphere”, but also as the “champion” (only “disputed” by Carlos Serra, one of the bloggers I covered for GVO) of their “Lusophone” Sub-Saharan Africa reporting. A second interesting observation is that less than one third of the bloggers covered are actually based in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Another, not less interesting, observation is that we get, just to give an example, issues and events about Angola or Sao Tome & Principe covered by East-Timorese or Portuguese blogs – which perhaps shouldn’t come as a surprise considering that some of these blogs are, to put it mildly, “highly influenced” (at least judging from the prominence of his picture on them) by none other than OC, who also appears as the presumable overseer of a “blog production line” (Fabrica de Blogues) spreading from Portugal to Timor. It’s also interesting to observe how OC manages to appear in the coverage of an event in Mozambique, which was being thoroughly covered by Mozambican bloggers in situ.

At first sight, one might be tempted to conclude that these trends reflect a lack of diversity of African-based blogs written in Portuguese. However, as it can be gathered from this list (where, incidentally, my blog doesn’t figure and, by their own admission, is “manipulated” by… exactly, OC), or from this one (where my blog is also not listed) that is not the case.

It is abundantly clear that the GVO “Portuguese-speaking Africa” editorial line is inspired by the concept of “lusofonia”. However, this raises a number of issues, starting with this: just imagine that you are a South African blogger systematically seeing events happening at your doorstep, and that you also blogged about, reported at GVO by British, Nigerian or American bloggers simply because they too are English-speaking and read about it in the conventional mainstream media, or in your own blog? Or that you are a Maurician or Malgache Creole-speaking citizen who finds your local issues covered at GVO by Gabonese, Algerian or Haitian bloggers, in French, just because their countries are also former French colonies? And this kind of examples could go on and on.

But perhaps the most problematic implication of that approach is that the concept of “lusofonia” itself is a highly contentious one and is far from reuniting consensus in all countries involved – not least because, on the one end, the majority of the African populations in those countries are primarily speakers of their own national languages and, on the other, the concept is highly reminiscent of the Portuguese colonial state’s imperial ideology, according to which there was a single “cultural unit” from Minho (extreme North of Portugal) to Timor - as reflected by the spread of the "OC blogging empire"...

The controversy generated by that approach can be gathered, for instance, from this article by a Mozambican professor of African Literatures at a Portuguese University, or from an article by a Brazilian writer and senior government official, whose link can be found on this post, or from another article by the Mozambican author Joao Craveirinha, whose link can be found on this post. However, these ponderous critical perspectives are unceremoniously dismissed as “gritaria” by the Portuguese language editorial team at GVO, which happens to be exclusively integrated by Brazilian citizens.

Now, on the question of who gets to determine, and under whose criteria, which are “the most interesting conversations and perspectives emerging from citizens’ media around the world”, as per the GVO “Primary Goals”?, let’s just look at some examples taken at random:

- How is it decided that this criticism of the publication for the first time in the Portuguese market of a magazine directed at African women is “more interesting” than, say, the criticisms arising from this, or this?

- How is it decided that this treatment of the “Miss Landmine Angola Pageant” is “more interesting” than, say, this one?

- How is it decided that this presentation of an Angolan music/dance genre is “more interesting” than, say, this one (where the main message is that “Angola is good for everybody except for Angolans”), or any of these (where the rising voices and social consciousness of a new generation of Angolan musicians appear loud and clear)?

- How is it decided that this tribute to Ian Smith is “more interesting”, than, say, something like this?

- How is it decided that this anonymous email message is credible and "more interesting" than any other possible account of the reality on the ground, such as these, or any of these?

- How is it decided that this account of the EU-Africa Summit is "more interesting than, say, this one?

- How is it decided that an event like this “is not interesting”?

Finally, how can GVO’s “loud silence” about this event be explained? The same GVO whose mission includes things like, “shining light on places and people other media often ignore (…) to make sense of it all, and to highlight things that bloggers are saying which mainstream media may not be reporting (…) to help people speak out in places where powerful forces would prevent them from doing so (…) and to enable more people whose voices and views are not heard to speak out online.”

The same GVO where articles like this, for example, can be read?

*N.B.: To be accurate, in all 6 instances where my blog appears on GVO links during the period under analysis, it was not on the initiative of the Portuguese-language editorial team. So, they shouldn't be included in this graph because, for all intents and purposes, this blog was excluded from their reporting in the last six months.

In the previous post, I raised, among others, the following questions:

Firstly, what is exactly the “mainstream media”? Does it include the same type of outlets in New York, Lisbon, Luanda, Boston, Porto, Brazilia, Maputo, London, Praia, Vila Nova de Gaia, Rio, Lubango or Dili? Secondly, to what extent can a blogger based in Portugal, USA, UK or Cabo Verde accurately reflect the voices of communities and individual citizens in N’Dalatando, Quelimane or Principe, whose concerns might not be heard online? Can such a blogger in any case reflect them better than another one based closer to those communities, unless he visits them regularly or has close family, friendship, or professional ties with them? Thirdly, who gets to determine, and under whose criteria, which are “the most interesting conversations and perspectives emerging from citizens’ media around the world”, as per the GVO “Primary Goals”?

Trying to find some answers, I took a close look at the GVO coverage of “Portuguese-speaking African countries” in the last six months*:

The most striking observation from this graph is that OC appears not only, as we have seen before, as the “undisputed champion” of GVO reporting about the “Angolan blogosphere”, but also as the “champion” (only “disputed” by Carlos Serra, one of the bloggers I covered for GVO) of their “Lusophone” Sub-Saharan Africa reporting. A second interesting observation is that less than one third of the bloggers covered are actually based in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Another, not less interesting, observation is that we get, just to give an example, issues and events about Angola or Sao Tome & Principe covered by East-Timorese or Portuguese blogs – which perhaps shouldn’t come as a surprise considering that some of these blogs are, to put it mildly, “highly influenced” (at least judging from the prominence of his picture on them) by none other than OC, who also appears as the presumable overseer of a “blog production line” (Fabrica de Blogues) spreading from Portugal to Timor. It’s also interesting to observe how OC manages to appear in the coverage of an event in Mozambique, which was being thoroughly covered by Mozambican bloggers in situ.

At first sight, one might be tempted to conclude that these trends reflect a lack of diversity of African-based blogs written in Portuguese. However, as it can be gathered from this list (where, incidentally, my blog doesn’t figure and, by their own admission, is “manipulated” by… exactly, OC), or from this one (where my blog is also not listed) that is not the case.

It is abundantly clear that the GVO “Portuguese-speaking Africa” editorial line is inspired by the concept of “lusofonia”. However, this raises a number of issues, starting with this: just imagine that you are a South African blogger systematically seeing events happening at your doorstep, and that you also blogged about, reported at GVO by British, Nigerian or American bloggers simply because they too are English-speaking and read about it in the conventional mainstream media, or in your own blog? Or that you are a Maurician or Malgache Creole-speaking citizen who finds your local issues covered at GVO by Gabonese, Algerian or Haitian bloggers, in French, just because their countries are also former French colonies? And this kind of examples could go on and on.

But perhaps the most problematic implication of that approach is that the concept of “lusofonia” itself is a highly contentious one and is far from reuniting consensus in all countries involved – not least because, on the one end, the majority of the African populations in those countries are primarily speakers of their own national languages and, on the other, the concept is highly reminiscent of the Portuguese colonial state’s imperial ideology, according to which there was a single “cultural unit” from Minho (extreme North of Portugal) to Timor - as reflected by the spread of the "OC blogging empire"...

The controversy generated by that approach can be gathered, for instance, from this article by a Mozambican professor of African Literatures at a Portuguese University, or from an article by a Brazilian writer and senior government official, whose link can be found on this post, or from another article by the Mozambican author Joao Craveirinha, whose link can be found on this post. However, these ponderous critical perspectives are unceremoniously dismissed as “gritaria” by the Portuguese language editorial team at GVO, which happens to be exclusively integrated by Brazilian citizens.

Now, on the question of who gets to determine, and under whose criteria, which are “the most interesting conversations and perspectives emerging from citizens’ media around the world”, as per the GVO “Primary Goals”?, let’s just look at some examples taken at random:

- How is it decided that this criticism of the publication for the first time in the Portuguese market of a magazine directed at African women is “more interesting” than, say, the criticisms arising from this, or this?

- How is it decided that this treatment of the “Miss Landmine Angola Pageant” is “more interesting” than, say, this one?

- How is it decided that this presentation of an Angolan music/dance genre is “more interesting” than, say, this one (where the main message is that “Angola is good for everybody except for Angolans”), or any of these (where the rising voices and social consciousness of a new generation of Angolan musicians appear loud and clear)?

- How is it decided that this tribute to Ian Smith is “more interesting”, than, say, something like this?

- How is it decided that this anonymous email message is credible and "more interesting" than any other possible account of the reality on the ground, such as these, or any of these?

- How is it decided that this account of the EU-Africa Summit is "more interesting than, say, this one?

- How is it decided that an event like this “is not interesting”?

Finally, how can GVO’s “loud silence” about this event be explained? The same GVO whose mission includes things like, “shining light on places and people other media often ignore (…) to make sense of it all, and to highlight things that bloggers are saying which mainstream media may not be reporting (…) to help people speak out in places where powerful forces would prevent them from doing so (…) and to enable more people whose voices and views are not heard to speak out online.”

The same GVO where articles like this, for example, can be read?

*N.B.: To be accurate, in all 6 instances where my blog appears on GVO links during the period under analysis, it was not on the initiative of the Portuguese-language editorial team. So, they shouldn't be included in this graph because, for all intents and purposes, this blog was excluded from their reporting in the last six months.

INTERROGATING THE BLOGOSPHERE (I)

Six months have passed since my last post in what turned out to be a very brief voluntary collaboration with GVO. So, I saw it fit to initiate this series of reflections on my life in the blogosphere so far with that experience.

When I started this journey in the blogosphere just over a year ago, I knew virtually nothing about it. I had accidentally come across one or two blogs before and that was it. So, when I was invited by the Sub-Saharan Africa editor of GVO to collaborate with them, covering the "Portuguese-speaking African countries", it took me a while to accept it but I eventually decided to take on the challenge – and how I knew from the beginning how much of a challenge it would be! I took it mainly as an opportunity to, as I gradually got to know the “lusosphere”, report about it, in English, to the global online community. So, to me it was all about “juntar o util ao agradavel”.

I set out without any particular agenda whatsoever, if not just because I didn’t know at all what I was about to find. But I had a very clear idea, guided by the GVO Manifesto and Mission Statement, that my work would be aimed at “shining light on places and people other media often ignore (…) to make sense of it all, and to highlight things that bloggers are saying which mainstream media may not be reporting (…) to help people speak out in places where powerful forces would prevent them from doing so (…) and to enable more people whose voices and views are not heard to speak out online.”

Well, I may have arrived at the blogosphere as naïve as a nun straight out of a convent, but I was (am) all but naïve about the real world. A real world where I have seen so many organisations, projects and people theoretically motivated by some of the most noble of principles, aims and objectives but, given the opportunities created by lack of transparency and accountability, the pursuit of individual agendas, or other factors such as ignorance, short-sightedness, personal insecurities and lack of professionalism, in practice easily turn into arrogant, megalomaniac, insensitive monsters practicing the exact opposite of what they claim to profess.

More to the point: even though, at the start of my “mission” with GVO, I had gone through a very rough path of conflicts with pornographic, racist and extreme-right sectors of the “lusosphere” who seemed not to have any other purpose in life than to attempt by all means necessary to harass me and tarnish my reputation in the blogosphere, both in mine and other blogs, I had no intention of, on my reporting for GVO, sidelining anyone who might have sided with them, by words, deeds or omissions, provided that their blog posts met the GVO principles and objectives – and this much I clearly stated in the introduction to my first post for GVO.

So, I started with a blog based in Portugal through which the global world, using its comprehensive blogroll, could access virtually the entire “lusosphere”. Thereafter, my main concern was to give utmost priority to bloggers based in the countries I was supposed to cover. This led me to follow up my reporting with the first blog I found in the Mozambican blogosphere, and then with one of the few blogs reporting from inside Angola. My reporting took the form of “bloggers profiles” mainly because of the relatively fewer number of blogs in those countries and their geographical and thematic dispersion. In my choices, there were no considerations of race, gender, politico-ideological orientation or any other subjective factors. There was, however, a clear concern with whether the issues they were blogging about were of the kind that may not be reported by the mainstream media, either in the respective countries or abroad.

And this is where things got complicated. Firstly, what is exactly the “mainstream media”? Does it include the same type of outlets in New York, Lisbon, Luanda, Boston, Porto, Brazilia, Maputo, London, Praia, Vila Nova de Gaia, Rio, Lubango or Dili? Secondly, to what extent can a blogger based in Portugal, USA, UK or Cabo Verde accurately reflect the voices of communities and individual citizens in N’Dalatando, Quelimane or Principe, whose concerns might not be heard online? Can such a blogger in any case reflect them better than another one based closer to those communities, unless he visits them regularly or has close family, friendship, or professional ties with them? Thirdly, who gets to determine, and under whose criteria, which are “the most interesting conversations and perspectives emerging from citizens’ media around the world”, as per the GVO “Primary Goals”?

Before attempting to answer any of these questions, let me talk about the reactions to my third, and eventually last, post for GVO. It was attacked, or rather, I was attacked because of it, on that blog by a group of lusophone bloggers led by one certain Orlando Castro (OC) and including the first blogger I had covered for GVO, on the absolutely groundless and personally insulting libel that “unlike the author of that blog, I had fled Angola without thinking!” Well, this is someone I don’t know and doesn’t know me personally apart from the blogosphere (the same applying to all the bloggers I’ve come across so far) and with whom, I must stress, I never had exchanged any comments or dialogues, directly or indirectly (in fact, I only got to properly know his blog after taking that blow on the stomach from him completely out of the blue) and I might even, as I went on with my work, if allowed to, at some point cover his and his group’s blogs.

The origin of that totally unprovoked and absurd libellous attack about my alleged “flight” from Angola, with or without thinking, is well determined in the “lusosphere”, as are the motivations of its author, and I had it thrown at my face before by the people who have been keeping me under siege in the blogosphere and have forced me to temporarily restrict access to my blog and implement comment moderation on it (costing me a considerable number of visitors, commentators, friends and contributors) and also forced me to get an interview I had given to the blog Szavanna about Angolan music withdrawn.

However, to this day I struggle to understand what led OC to come up with it at that particular blog I covered for GVO. “Is it because I is black?”, as Ali G would ask, or was it because, unlike the previous two bloggers I had covered, the owner of that blog happens to be black? Or was it because I am a woman? Was it because that was the first Angolan-based blog I covered? Or did he think that his blog should have been the first to be covered? Or was it something to do with the subject matter of the post covered itself? I honestly don’t know.

What I have no doubts about is that OC and his followers descended there like a tonne of bricks upon me mainly to personally profit in one way or another from the exposure that blog would gain as a result of its appearance on GVO – interestingly enough, even before I started volunteering for GVO, I had made a comment on that blog (although only to get back a cold shoulder from its author, which I totally failed to understand at the time) and had at some stage linked it on my blog; however I don’t remember ever seeing there before a comment by OC or his friends, or the blog in question figuring in their blogrolls, or vice-versa.

However, the most disturbing of it all for me was that, as if I were carelessly poking a cobra with a very short stick, the supposed potential beneficiary of my voluntary time, effort and attention in that particular instance, in a fit of irrational hatred that I can only understand as the result of the most explosive mixture of ignorance, bad manners, inferiority and subaltern complexes and inversed racism, sided with OC against me, thus effectively behaving like a “turkey voting for Christmas”. This surely caught the attention of someone, somewhere, at GVO, who found in my attackers “the courage of their convictions”! The result?*

Still had any doubts that crime (in this case, opportunism, racism, bullying, intrigue, slander, defamation and libel) actually does pay? So, who is this “suppa duppa dude”, who, clearly as a reward for acting as a deranged sniper bent on forcing me out of my work with GVO and ultimately drive me offline, for allegedly “having fled my country of origin”, all of a sudden started to appear on GVO (I don’t recall his blog ever being mentioned there before) as the “undisputed champion” of blogging about Angola, while continuing undeterred with his vicious, venomous attacks, open or veiled, against me in association with his allies?

For all I know, he is a “professional journalist” (or at least he displays his Portuguese Journalists’ Union card number on his blog profile) who, together with other two bloggers who form among themselves an “exclusive and closed mutual appreciation society” of sorts, works for the mainstream online media outlet “Noticias Lusofonas”, based in Portugal. So, how likely is it that whatever issues he blogs about might not be reported by mainstream media? He is based in an interior locality of Portugal, Vila Nova de Gaia, not even in the capital, Lisboa, or any of the other major cities in the country, such as Porto, Setubal, Faro or Coimbra, where he could have some exposure to and direct contact with the African communities whose majority is based in those centres. So, how reliable can his blog be to reflect the voices of those citizens and of their families in Africa to the global world?

I also happen to know that OC is part of a group of former Portuguese settlers (colonos) who, in 1974, joined UNITA, because its president, Jonas Savimbi, backed by apartheid South Africa, presented himself to them as “the real and only safeguard of white interests in Angola”, while allegedly saying the exact opposite in his speeches in his mother tongue, Umbundu, which most of the white population couldn’t understand (yes, so much for the ‘lusofonia’…). However, he was not among the few whites who stayed in the country after independence in 1975, either fighting Savimbi’s battles on the ground, or on the other side enduring the effects of the long fratricide war, directly or indirectly, as my family and I did, together with the vast majority of Angolans. He fled the country.

Exactly, with or without thinking, he fled Angola in 1975 and never went back! Along the last 30 years, most of Savimbi’s white supporters, inside or outside the country, abandoned his ranks and some are now amongst his main detractors, having become stern defenders of the idea (right or wrong, that’s not what I’m discussing here) that if white interests were ever safeguarded in Angola by any political force, it was by the ruling party, MPLA, and that only they themselves could have done better. However, through his writings, it becomes apparent that he might go back only when “they themselves are in a position of power to do it, because they do it better!” In the meantime, and unlike even some of the most deeply-rooted UNITA militants, he continues to this day to refer to Savimbi as “My President”! So, that’s OC for you.

Most of his and his closest allies’ blog posts about African issues reflect the mentality of those around the world who attribute all African problems exclusively to the “innate incapability” of Africans – to whom he often refers indiscriminately as “monkeys who keep falling from trees because they have to take off one of their shoes in order to be able to count to 12…” – and pretend to pass themselves as “the voices of the voiceless” with an unmistakable, if hidden, ideological agenda: that of advancing, by hook, by crook, or by fluke, the cause of “recolonisation”. His blogging about Angola is all mainly based on reports by the mainstream media in Angola or Portugal and, as a result of that, his opinions are at best secondary and derivative and at worst little more than fabrications of a “fertile imagination”.

He seldom, if ever, reveals “his sources” on the ground, either for the texts or the pictures, (in fact, at least once he used one of my exclusive pictures but, unlike his closest friend, didn't acknowledge it), he publishes about Angola, most of which are not real illustrations of the “facts” and locations he purports to talk about, but selectively chosen to depict the worst possible images of Africa, all invariably reminiscent of the great draught and famine in the Ethiopia of the ‘80s, widely published by the western mainstream media and continually disseminated throughout certain sectors in the blogosphere as the “trademark” image of all countries in Africa, all the time. So, is “citizen’s media” according to GVO based on facts lived and observed in loco, or on second or third-hand, recycled opinion, and clichés produced at a long and safe geographical, cultural and temporal distance?

Now, before I proceed to attempt to find answers to the questions I have been posing, let me say that I am not fighting my causes, whatever they may be, through this. I’ve been fighting my causes, some worthy, others less so, throughout my life by a variety of legitimate means, and achieving whatever goals I might have set to myself in the blogosphere is not dependent on the ‘good will’ of anyone – certainly not anyone at GVO. So, you might ask why am I then making such a fuss about all this, particularly having said at the time that I would rather not elaborate on the reasons for my decision to end my collaboration with GVO? Isn’t this going to generate even more gratuitous publicity and “popular support” for the villains in this story? Shouldn’t I know better, for my blog and my own’s sake, than “messing with the big guys”?

My answer is very simple: because, my dear friends, this is my blog! This is the space where I’m supposed to freely talk about the things that affect me, my life, my family and friends in Africa and the society(ies), real or virtual, geographically close or distant, that I happen to live in, whenever I feel it necessary and appropriate to do so, without fear of persecution, backlash, personal vendettas or any other kind of retaliation.

Ultimately, I believe that it is my right and my duty to interrogate, and hopefully unveil, some of the processes through which certain “powers that be” actually “come to be” to begin with… before some of us start issuing “calls for recolonisation”! Otherwise, what would the blogosphere be for, or is all about, after all?

And, actually, things have reached a point where I have nothing to lose…

*N.B.: To be accurate, in all 6 instances where my blog appears on GVO links during the period under analysis, it was not on the initiative of the Portuguese-language editorial team. So, they shouldn't be included in this graph because, for all intents and purposes, this blog was excluded from their reporting in the last six months.

Six months have passed since my last post in what turned out to be a very brief voluntary collaboration with GVO. So, I saw it fit to initiate this series of reflections on my life in the blogosphere so far with that experience.

When I started this journey in the blogosphere just over a year ago, I knew virtually nothing about it. I had accidentally come across one or two blogs before and that was it. So, when I was invited by the Sub-Saharan Africa editor of GVO to collaborate with them, covering the "Portuguese-speaking African countries", it took me a while to accept it but I eventually decided to take on the challenge – and how I knew from the beginning how much of a challenge it would be! I took it mainly as an opportunity to, as I gradually got to know the “lusosphere”, report about it, in English, to the global online community. So, to me it was all about “juntar o util ao agradavel”.

I set out without any particular agenda whatsoever, if not just because I didn’t know at all what I was about to find. But I had a very clear idea, guided by the GVO Manifesto and Mission Statement, that my work would be aimed at “shining light on places and people other media often ignore (…) to make sense of it all, and to highlight things that bloggers are saying which mainstream media may not be reporting (…) to help people speak out in places where powerful forces would prevent them from doing so (…) and to enable more people whose voices and views are not heard to speak out online.”

Well, I may have arrived at the blogosphere as naïve as a nun straight out of a convent, but I was (am) all but naïve about the real world. A real world where I have seen so many organisations, projects and people theoretically motivated by some of the most noble of principles, aims and objectives but, given the opportunities created by lack of transparency and accountability, the pursuit of individual agendas, or other factors such as ignorance, short-sightedness, personal insecurities and lack of professionalism, in practice easily turn into arrogant, megalomaniac, insensitive monsters practicing the exact opposite of what they claim to profess.

More to the point: even though, at the start of my “mission” with GVO, I had gone through a very rough path of conflicts with pornographic, racist and extreme-right sectors of the “lusosphere” who seemed not to have any other purpose in life than to attempt by all means necessary to harass me and tarnish my reputation in the blogosphere, both in mine and other blogs, I had no intention of, on my reporting for GVO, sidelining anyone who might have sided with them, by words, deeds or omissions, provided that their blog posts met the GVO principles and objectives – and this much I clearly stated in the introduction to my first post for GVO.

So, I started with a blog based in Portugal through which the global world, using its comprehensive blogroll, could access virtually the entire “lusosphere”. Thereafter, my main concern was to give utmost priority to bloggers based in the countries I was supposed to cover. This led me to follow up my reporting with the first blog I found in the Mozambican blogosphere, and then with one of the few blogs reporting from inside Angola. My reporting took the form of “bloggers profiles” mainly because of the relatively fewer number of blogs in those countries and their geographical and thematic dispersion. In my choices, there were no considerations of race, gender, politico-ideological orientation or any other subjective factors. There was, however, a clear concern with whether the issues they were blogging about were of the kind that may not be reported by the mainstream media, either in the respective countries or abroad.

And this is where things got complicated. Firstly, what is exactly the “mainstream media”? Does it include the same type of outlets in New York, Lisbon, Luanda, Boston, Porto, Brazilia, Maputo, London, Praia, Vila Nova de Gaia, Rio, Lubango or Dili? Secondly, to what extent can a blogger based in Portugal, USA, UK or Cabo Verde accurately reflect the voices of communities and individual citizens in N’Dalatando, Quelimane or Principe, whose concerns might not be heard online? Can such a blogger in any case reflect them better than another one based closer to those communities, unless he visits them regularly or has close family, friendship, or professional ties with them? Thirdly, who gets to determine, and under whose criteria, which are “the most interesting conversations and perspectives emerging from citizens’ media around the world”, as per the GVO “Primary Goals”?

Before attempting to answer any of these questions, let me talk about the reactions to my third, and eventually last, post for GVO. It was attacked, or rather, I was attacked because of it, on that blog by a group of lusophone bloggers led by one certain Orlando Castro (OC) and including the first blogger I had covered for GVO, on the absolutely groundless and personally insulting libel that “unlike the author of that blog, I had fled Angola without thinking!” Well, this is someone I don’t know and doesn’t know me personally apart from the blogosphere (the same applying to all the bloggers I’ve come across so far) and with whom, I must stress, I never had exchanged any comments or dialogues, directly or indirectly (in fact, I only got to properly know his blog after taking that blow on the stomach from him completely out of the blue) and I might even, as I went on with my work, if allowed to, at some point cover his and his group’s blogs.

The origin of that totally unprovoked and absurd libellous attack about my alleged “flight” from Angola, with or without thinking, is well determined in the “lusosphere”, as are the motivations of its author, and I had it thrown at my face before by the people who have been keeping me under siege in the blogosphere and have forced me to temporarily restrict access to my blog and implement comment moderation on it (costing me a considerable number of visitors, commentators, friends and contributors) and also forced me to get an interview I had given to the blog Szavanna about Angolan music withdrawn.

However, to this day I struggle to understand what led OC to come up with it at that particular blog I covered for GVO. “Is it because I is black?”, as Ali G would ask, or was it because, unlike the previous two bloggers I had covered, the owner of that blog happens to be black? Or was it because I am a woman? Was it because that was the first Angolan-based blog I covered? Or did he think that his blog should have been the first to be covered? Or was it something to do with the subject matter of the post covered itself? I honestly don’t know.

What I have no doubts about is that OC and his followers descended there like a tonne of bricks upon me mainly to personally profit in one way or another from the exposure that blog would gain as a result of its appearance on GVO – interestingly enough, even before I started volunteering for GVO, I had made a comment on that blog (although only to get back a cold shoulder from its author, which I totally failed to understand at the time) and had at some stage linked it on my blog; however I don’t remember ever seeing there before a comment by OC or his friends, or the blog in question figuring in their blogrolls, or vice-versa.

However, the most disturbing of it all for me was that, as if I were carelessly poking a cobra with a very short stick, the supposed potential beneficiary of my voluntary time, effort and attention in that particular instance, in a fit of irrational hatred that I can only understand as the result of the most explosive mixture of ignorance, bad manners, inferiority and subaltern complexes and inversed racism, sided with OC against me, thus effectively behaving like a “turkey voting for Christmas”. This surely caught the attention of someone, somewhere, at GVO, who found in my attackers “the courage of their convictions”! The result?*

Still had any doubts that crime (in this case, opportunism, racism, bullying, intrigue, slander, defamation and libel) actually does pay? So, who is this “suppa duppa dude”, who, clearly as a reward for acting as a deranged sniper bent on forcing me out of my work with GVO and ultimately drive me offline, for allegedly “having fled my country of origin”, all of a sudden started to appear on GVO (I don’t recall his blog ever being mentioned there before) as the “undisputed champion” of blogging about Angola, while continuing undeterred with his vicious, venomous attacks, open or veiled, against me in association with his allies?

For all I know, he is a “professional journalist” (or at least he displays his Portuguese Journalists’ Union card number on his blog profile) who, together with other two bloggers who form among themselves an “exclusive and closed mutual appreciation society” of sorts, works for the mainstream online media outlet “Noticias Lusofonas”, based in Portugal. So, how likely is it that whatever issues he blogs about might not be reported by mainstream media? He is based in an interior locality of Portugal, Vila Nova de Gaia, not even in the capital, Lisboa, or any of the other major cities in the country, such as Porto, Setubal, Faro or Coimbra, where he could have some exposure to and direct contact with the African communities whose majority is based in those centres. So, how reliable can his blog be to reflect the voices of those citizens and of their families in Africa to the global world?

I also happen to know that OC is part of a group of former Portuguese settlers (colonos) who, in 1974, joined UNITA, because its president, Jonas Savimbi, backed by apartheid South Africa, presented himself to them as “the real and only safeguard of white interests in Angola”, while allegedly saying the exact opposite in his speeches in his mother tongue, Umbundu, which most of the white population couldn’t understand (yes, so much for the ‘lusofonia’…). However, he was not among the few whites who stayed in the country after independence in 1975, either fighting Savimbi’s battles on the ground, or on the other side enduring the effects of the long fratricide war, directly or indirectly, as my family and I did, together with the vast majority of Angolans. He fled the country.

Exactly, with or without thinking, he fled Angola in 1975 and never went back! Along the last 30 years, most of Savimbi’s white supporters, inside or outside the country, abandoned his ranks and some are now amongst his main detractors, having become stern defenders of the idea (right or wrong, that’s not what I’m discussing here) that if white interests were ever safeguarded in Angola by any political force, it was by the ruling party, MPLA, and that only they themselves could have done better. However, through his writings, it becomes apparent that he might go back only when “they themselves are in a position of power to do it, because they do it better!” In the meantime, and unlike even some of the most deeply-rooted UNITA militants, he continues to this day to refer to Savimbi as “My President”! So, that’s OC for you.

Most of his and his closest allies’ blog posts about African issues reflect the mentality of those around the world who attribute all African problems exclusively to the “innate incapability” of Africans – to whom he often refers indiscriminately as “monkeys who keep falling from trees because they have to take off one of their shoes in order to be able to count to 12…” – and pretend to pass themselves as “the voices of the voiceless” with an unmistakable, if hidden, ideological agenda: that of advancing, by hook, by crook, or by fluke, the cause of “recolonisation”. His blogging about Angola is all mainly based on reports by the mainstream media in Angola or Portugal and, as a result of that, his opinions are at best secondary and derivative and at worst little more than fabrications of a “fertile imagination”.

He seldom, if ever, reveals “his sources” on the ground, either for the texts or the pictures, (in fact, at least once he used one of my exclusive pictures but, unlike his closest friend, didn't acknowledge it), he publishes about Angola, most of which are not real illustrations of the “facts” and locations he purports to talk about, but selectively chosen to depict the worst possible images of Africa, all invariably reminiscent of the great draught and famine in the Ethiopia of the ‘80s, widely published by the western mainstream media and continually disseminated throughout certain sectors in the blogosphere as the “trademark” image of all countries in Africa, all the time. So, is “citizen’s media” according to GVO based on facts lived and observed in loco, or on second or third-hand, recycled opinion, and clichés produced at a long and safe geographical, cultural and temporal distance?

Now, before I proceed to attempt to find answers to the questions I have been posing, let me say that I am not fighting my causes, whatever they may be, through this. I’ve been fighting my causes, some worthy, others less so, throughout my life by a variety of legitimate means, and achieving whatever goals I might have set to myself in the blogosphere is not dependent on the ‘good will’ of anyone – certainly not anyone at GVO. So, you might ask why am I then making such a fuss about all this, particularly having said at the time that I would rather not elaborate on the reasons for my decision to end my collaboration with GVO? Isn’t this going to generate even more gratuitous publicity and “popular support” for the villains in this story? Shouldn’t I know better, for my blog and my own’s sake, than “messing with the big guys”?

My answer is very simple: because, my dear friends, this is my blog! This is the space where I’m supposed to freely talk about the things that affect me, my life, my family and friends in Africa and the society(ies), real or virtual, geographically close or distant, that I happen to live in, whenever I feel it necessary and appropriate to do so, without fear of persecution, backlash, personal vendettas or any other kind of retaliation.

Ultimately, I believe that it is my right and my duty to interrogate, and hopefully unveil, some of the processes through which certain “powers that be” actually “come to be” to begin with… before some of us start issuing “calls for recolonisation”! Otherwise, what would the blogosphere be for, or is all about, after all?

And, actually, things have reached a point where I have nothing to lose…

*N.B.: To be accurate, in all 6 instances where my blog appears on GVO links during the period under analysis, it was not on the initiative of the Portuguese-language editorial team. So, they shouldn't be included in this graph because, for all intents and purposes, this blog was excluded from their reporting in the last six months.

TERMINANDO A MINHA COLABORACAO COM O GVO...

... Pelo menos no que respeita a "lusosfera Africana".
Essa foi a decisao a que cheguei depois de profunda ponderacao nas ultimas semanas. Elaborar aqui sobre as razoes talvez ate' fosse um exercicio util e saudavel - so' que eu tambem tinha pensado que aquela "tarefa ingrata" em que me envolvi voluntariamente ha' 3 meses atras o seria - mas, para poupar razoes direi apenas isto: desculpem-me, mas tenho mais que fazer.
Mantenho, no entanto, a minha disponibilidade para colaborar com o GVO em quaisquer outros projectos que nao envolvam o mundo lusofono.

... Pelo menos no que respeita a "lusosfera Africana".
Essa foi a decisao a que cheguei depois de profunda ponderacao nas ultimas semanas. Elaborar aqui sobre as razoes talvez ate' fosse um exercicio util e saudavel - so' que eu tambem tinha pensado que aquela "tarefa ingrata" em que me envolvi voluntariamente ha' 3 meses atras o seria - mas, para poupar razoes direi apenas isto: desculpem-me, mas tenho mais que fazer.
Mantenho, no entanto, a minha disponibilidade para colaborar com o GVO em quaisquer outros projectos que nao envolvam o mundo lusofono.

OUTBLOGGING @ GLOBAL VOICES ONLINE (III)

ANGOLA: 'BLOGANDO' A PARTIR DO INTERIOR DO PAIS (I)

Com uma população estimada em quase dezasseis milhões de habitantes, cinco anos depois do fim da longa guerra que durou cerca de trinta anos, a rede fixa da empresa estatal Angola Telecom apenas serve menos de um porcento da população, os Provedores de Serviços de Internet não chegam a servir uma pessoa entre mil e há apenas cerca de catorze usuários da Internet por cada mil pessoas.*

Porém, apesar deste quadro pouco animador, há alguns 'bloggers' no país, embora eles estejam maioritáriamente baseados na capital, Luanda. Há também pelo menos duas “ almas bravas” a 'blogar' a partir das províncias do interior do país. Dentre estes, tenho vindo a seguir o 'blog' “Serra da Chela” (que comemora este mês o seu primeiro aniversário), do jornalista Manuel Vieira, baseado no Lubango, capital da província sulana da Huíla. Apesar de blogar principalmente sobre/a partir daquela localidade, ele também o faz a partir de Luanda e outras províncias do interior do país (e, nos últimos dias, a partir de Moçambique e Swazilândia).

Um dos seus artigos que particularmente chamou a minha atenção trata de uma questão que revela, por um lado, o espectro da fome causado pelo clima e as condições metereológicas locais e, por outro lado, os conflitos que opõem as autoridades locais, em representação das suas comunidades, e as companhias extractivas que vêem explorando os recursos naturais da região sem, contudo, cumprirem com as responsabilidades sociais por si assumidas:

POPULARES DO MUNICÍPIO DOS GAMBOS, PROVÍNCIA DA HUÍLA, DENUNCIAM GRITANTES ESPECTROS DE FOME NO INTERIOR DAQUELA LOCALIDADE.

(LER ARTIGO AQUI)

ANGOLA: 'BLOGANDO' A PARTIR DO INTERIOR DO PAIS (I)

Com uma população estimada em quase dezasseis milhões de habitantes, cinco anos depois do fim da longa guerra que durou cerca de trinta anos, a rede fixa da empresa estatal Angola Telecom apenas serve menos de um porcento da população, os Provedores de Serviços de Internet não chegam a servir uma pessoa entre mil e há apenas cerca de catorze usuários da Internet por cada mil pessoas.*

Porém, apesar deste quadro pouco animador, há alguns 'bloggers' no país, embora eles estejam maioritáriamente baseados na capital, Luanda. Há também pelo menos duas “ almas bravas” a 'blogar' a partir das províncias do interior do país. Dentre estes, tenho vindo a seguir o 'blog' “Serra da Chela” (que comemora este mês o seu primeiro aniversário), do jornalista Manuel Vieira, baseado no Lubango, capital da província sulana da Huíla. Apesar de blogar principalmente sobre/a partir daquela localidade, ele também o faz a partir de Luanda e outras províncias do interior do país (e, nos últimos dias, a partir de Moçambique e Swazilândia).

Um dos seus artigos que particularmente chamou a minha atenção trata de uma questão que revela, por um lado, o espectro da fome causado pelo clima e as condições metereológicas locais e, por outro lado, os conflitos que opõem as autoridades locais, em representação das suas comunidades, e as companhias extractivas que vêem explorando os recursos naturais da região sem, contudo, cumprirem com as responsabilidades sociais por si assumidas:

POPULARES DO MUNICÍPIO DOS GAMBOS, PROVÍNCIA DA HUÍLA, DENUNCIAM GRITANTES ESPECTROS DE FOME NO INTERIOR DAQUELA LOCALIDADE.

(LER ARTIGO AQUI)

OUTBLOGGING @ GLOBAL VOICES ONLINE (II)

Enquanto navegava pela blogosfera Moçambicana, encontrei o “Diário de um Sociólogo”, um blog de Carlos Serra, sociólogo Moçambicano baseado em Maputo e associado à Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, a universidade pública do país. Tem, portanto, o potencial de oferecer uma interessante mistura de observação pessoal e comentário acadêmico, no meio de, como ele o apresenta, “um pouco de tudo: sociologia (em especial uma sociologia de intervenção rápida), filosofia, dia-a-dia, profundidade, superficialidade, ironia, poesia, fragilidade, força, mito, desnudamento de mitos, emoção e razão.”

Das suas actuais ofertas decidi pegar numa análise comparativa entre as posições políticas do recém-eleito Presidente Francês, Nicolas Sarkozy, e do Presidente Moçambicano, Armando Guebuza. Apresentada em quatro partes, a análise começa com esta pergunta, “Existe alguma afinidade política entre os programas políticos do presidente Sarkozy de França e do presidente Guebuza de Moçambique?”, sendo as restantes três partes dedicadas à resposta. Assim vai:


(LER ARTIGO AQUI)

Enquanto navegava pela blogosfera Moçambicana, encontrei o “Diário de um Sociólogo”, um blog de Carlos Serra, sociólogo Moçambicano baseado em Maputo e associado à Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, a universidade pública do país. Tem, portanto, o potencial de oferecer uma interessante mistura de observação pessoal e comentário acadêmico, no meio de, como ele o apresenta, “um pouco de tudo: sociologia (em especial uma sociologia de intervenção rápida), filosofia, dia-a-dia, profundidade, superficialidade, ironia, poesia, fragilidade, força, mito, desnudamento de mitos, emoção e razão.”

Das suas actuais ofertas decidi pegar numa análise comparativa entre as posições políticas do recém-eleito Presidente Francês, Nicolas Sarkozy, e do Presidente Moçambicano, Armando Guebuza. Apresentada em quatro partes, a análise começa com esta pergunta, “Existe alguma afinidade política entre os programas políticos do presidente Sarkozy de França e do presidente Guebuza de Moçambique?”, sendo as restantes três partes dedicadas à resposta. Assim vai:


(LER ARTIGO AQUI)

INICIANDO COLABORACAO NO 'GLOBAL VOICES ONLINE'

Com este post, iniciei a minha colaboracao regular no Global Voices Online (GV), cobrindo a “lusosfera” Africana:

"Kitanda - Uma Porta Aberta para a 'Lusosfera' Africana

Quando desejar encontrar o seu caminho na “lusosfera” Africana, um dos melhores lugares para comecar e’ o blog “Kitanda”. O “Kitanda” tornou-se ao longo dos anos, desde o seu lancamento em 2004, uma referencia incontornavel na “lusosfera”.

Dedicado principalmente a divulgacao de poesia escrita em Portugues por autores de todos os paises lusofonos, o Kitanda tambem oferece frequentemente um olhar critico sobre acontecimentos e situacoes com impacto social e politico nesses paises e internacionalmente, tudo “embrulhado” em imagens evocativas, musica ambiente e, nao menos importante, um abrangente ‘blogroll’ da “lusosfera”.

O ‘post’ em anexo e’ apenas um exemplo do seu espirito: apresenta a musica e letra de "Luanda", do grupo luandense de ‘hiphop’ “Kalibrados”, expressando as tristezas e alegrias da capital Angolana e dos seus cidadaos. A musica e’ particularmente enriquecida pelo uso da linha melodica de uma das perolas da musica Angolana, “Monami”, pela eminente cantora, recentemente falecida, Lourdes Vandunem.”

(Ler o ‘post’ integral aqui)

***

Confesso que, embora sentindo-me honrada, nao me foi nada facil aceitar o convite que me foi feito ha’ uns meses pelo GV, por saber o quanto a tarefa nao sera’ facil. Mas, finalmente, decidi-me a aceitar o desafio, movida pelos objectivos que norteiam o GV: “agregar, preservar e amplificar a conversacao global online – iluminando lugares e pessoas que outros midia frequentemente ignoram.”

Mais especificamente, a minha funcao consistira’ em seleccionar, traduzir para o Ingles e editar ‘posts’ publicados em Portugues na “lusosfera”, sediada ou nao em Africa, com particular enfase nos ‘PALOP’. Os criterios de seleccao serao baseados nao tanto nos ‘blogs’ ou respectivos ‘bloggers’, mas nos ‘posts’ e sua relevancia para os paises em questao e os objectivos do GV.

Obviamente, nao me sera’ possivel estar sempre a par, em tempo oportuno, de todos os posts que obedecam a esses criterios na “lusosfera” Africana, pelo que desde ja’ agradeco a colaboracao de todos os ‘bloggers’ e leitores interessados em ver um particular ‘post’ publicado no GV que mo comuniquem pelo endereco electronico que poderao encontrar no ‘profile’ deste blog.

Com este post, iniciei a minha colaboracao regular no Global Voices Online (GV), cobrindo a “lusosfera” Africana:

"Kitanda - Uma Porta Aberta para a 'Lusosfera' Africana

Quando desejar encontrar o seu caminho na “lusosfera” Africana, um dos melhores lugares para comecar e’ o blog “Kitanda”. O “Kitanda” tornou-se ao longo dos anos, desde o seu lancamento em 2004, uma referencia incontornavel na “lusosfera”.

Dedicado principalmente a divulgacao de poesia escrita em Portugues por autores de todos os paises lusofonos, o Kitanda tambem oferece frequentemente um olhar critico sobre acontecimentos e situacoes com impacto social e politico nesses paises e internacionalmente, tudo “embrulhado” em imagens evocativas, musica ambiente e, nao menos importante, um abrangente ‘blogroll’ da “lusosfera”.

O ‘post’ em anexo e’ apenas um exemplo do seu espirito: apresenta a musica e letra de "Luanda", do grupo luandense de ‘hiphop’ “Kalibrados”, expressando as tristezas e alegrias da capital Angolana e dos seus cidadaos. A musica e’ particularmente enriquecida pelo uso da linha melodica de uma das perolas da musica Angolana, “Monami”, pela eminente cantora, recentemente falecida, Lourdes Vandunem.”

(Ler o ‘post’ integral aqui)

***

Confesso que, embora sentindo-me honrada, nao me foi nada facil aceitar o convite que me foi feito ha’ uns meses pelo GV, por saber o quanto a tarefa nao sera’ facil. Mas, finalmente, decidi-me a aceitar o desafio, movida pelos objectivos que norteiam o GV: “agregar, preservar e amplificar a conversacao global online – iluminando lugares e pessoas que outros midia frequentemente ignoram.”

Mais especificamente, a minha funcao consistira’ em seleccionar, traduzir para o Ingles e editar ‘posts’ publicados em Portugues na “lusosfera”, sediada ou nao em Africa, com particular enfase nos ‘PALOP’. Os criterios de seleccao serao baseados nao tanto nos ‘blogs’ ou respectivos ‘bloggers’, mas nos ‘posts’ e sua relevancia para os paises em questao e os objectivos do GV.

Obviamente, nao me sera’ possivel estar sempre a par, em tempo oportuno, de todos os posts que obedecam a esses criterios na “lusosfera” Africana, pelo que desde ja’ agradeco a colaboracao de todos os ‘bloggers’ e leitores interessados em ver um particular ‘post’ publicado no GV que mo comuniquem pelo endereco electronico que poderao encontrar no ‘profile’ deste blog.