Cliff Chiduku
The BBC recently announced plans to close or merge several of its radio and television services as part of efforts to reduce costs.
Among the services affected are BBC Three, BBC Scotland and BBC Radio 4 Extra, with the changes expected to take effect in spring 2027.
The British public service broadcaster has also announced plans to cut more than 100 jobs from its news operation as it seeks to make significant savings. The news is worrying, particularly for the future of media organisations in the Global South.
If an institution as well-resourced and globally recognised as the BBC is being forced to rethink its operations, what does this mean for media organisations operating on shoe-string budgets in Africa?
Back home, we know only too well what is happening in Zimbabwe’s media industry.
For years, we have been told that the future of media sustainability lies primarily in going digital. Newsrooms have been urged to adopt digital-first strategies, build audiences on social media, develop online products and embrace new technologies.
But perhaps we need to ask a more fundamental question: Is digital transformation really a sustainability strategy, or is it simply a change in the way journalism is delivered?
The BBC has been digital for years.
Its journalism is available across virtually every platform imaginable, including BBC iPlayer and BBC Sounds. Yet the corporation is still having to make difficult decisions about services, jobs and costs. This should force us to rethink the sustainability conversation.
Media sustainability has become one of the biggest challenges facing journalism in an era of rapid technological change.
Advertising revenues have declined, audiences have migrated to social media, print circulation has suffered and news organisations are competing with an enormous volume of free online content.
Technology has expanded access to information, but it has not necessarily created sustainable business models for those producing credible journalism.
For years, donor funding has also provided a lifeline for many media organisations, particularly in developing countries. But that model is increasingly under pressure as international aid budgets contract and donor priorities change.
The result is a media industry caught between declining traditional revenues and uncertain digital ones.
So, what happens next?
Perhaps we need to return to an idea that has often been treated with suspicion: public investment in journalism.
Information is a public good. A functioning media sector is essential to democracy, accountability, development and informed citizenship.
If governments recognise the importance of roads, schools, hospitals and other public infrastructure, perhaps credible information should also be viewed as part of the infrastructure of a functioning society.
This does not necessarily mean governments taking control of newsrooms or determining what journalists should publish. Quite the opposite. Any public-support model must be designed to protect editorial independence.
Public support can take different forms, including tax incentives, licensing frameworks, innovation grants, public-interest funds and other transparent mechanisms that allow media organisations to survive without compromising their independence.
There are lessons to be drawn from countries that have developed public-support mechanisms designed to sustain media plurality, including support targeted at smaller and local publications.
This is particularly important in Africa, where smaller indigenous media organisations often struggle to compete with large international platforms for advertising and audiences. The objective should not simply be to keep struggling media houses alive.
It should be to preserve plurality, diversity and access to credible information.
A country with only a handful of financially powerful media organisations risks narrowing the public conversation.
A healthy media ecosystem needs national broadcasters, commercial players, community media, independent publications and emerging digital platforms.
The challenge, therefore, is bigger than getting newspapers onto websites or journalists onto social media. We need to rethink what we mean by media sustainability.
Going digital is important. Innovation is important. New revenue models are important. But journalism is ultimately a public-interest enterprise, and society cannot afford to leave its survival entirely to advertising markets, algorithms, clicks and the generosity of donors. The lesson from the BBC’s restructuring should not be that the digital media has failed. Rather, it should remind us that technology can change the distribution of journalism without solving the economics of journalism. If we want credible journalism to survive, particularly in countries such as Zimbabwe, we may need to accept that the market alone cannot carry the entire burden.
The future of media may, therefore, depend not only on how cleverly news organisations embrace technology, but also on whether governments, businesses and society are prepared to recognise journalism for what it is: not merely a commercial product, but essential public infrastructure.
Cliff Chiduku is a communications, public relations and media professional with more than 20 years of experience spanning journalism, corporate communications and strategic public relations. He holds an MA in Digital Journalism from Aga Khan University, an MSc in Public Policy and Governance from the University of Zimbabwe and a BA in Media and Communication Studies. He can be contacted on +263 775 716 517 or at [email protected]
