Football and Dictatorships
How much of Equatorial Guinean’s tax money did the Obiangs pay to the Spanish FA for a meaningless match between its national teams?
508 Articles by:
Sean Jacobs
Sean Jacobs, Founder-Editor of Africa is a Country, is on the faculty of The New School.
Kwadwo Asamoah makes it 150 appearances in Serie A
Asamoah, who just achieved milestone of 150 Serie A appearances, is not shy about publicly sharing his good fortune. He is a relentless tweeter, sharing pics of teammates including one of his son with Giorgio Ciellini (“Beauty and the Beast“), meeting the king of the Asante or — that staple of West African footballers — professing his love of Jesus (serial hashtag: #BecauseofHim).
When marketing men make films about football
I finally got around to watching "Thierry Henry 1:1" on iTunes. The promo material is written in breathless prose: “Who is the personality hidden in this dream career? … What are his ideals? What goals does he want to reach? … Thierry Henry is a world star torn between past and present.” This is all false advertising as nothing is really at stake in this film.
What is marketed as a film about the career of Henry—the highest scorer in the history of Arsenal, before he joined the New York Red Bulls in 2010—is really a 52-minute PR video made for the benefit of the Red Bulls, the MLS and their sponsors; the film is produced by Red Bull Media House.
Stock images of the tourist parts of Manhattan, central Paris and London are intercut with Henry prepping for two meaningless matches—the 2011 MLS All Star Game (the best of the MLS vs Manchester United’s summer team in New Jersey) and the “Emirates Cup” (Red Bulls vs Arsenal). In the Emirates Cup game, a draw means Red Bulls win and Henry will receive a meaningless trophy. The filmmakers act like these matches mean something. They even rope in Hans Backe (former Red Bulls coach) to speak about tactics while riding on the team bus.
Henry mostly comes across as bored. One of the few times he shows real interest is when asked about whether he would like to visit Highbury (Arsenal’s old stadium). Here Henry seems genuinely emotional speaking about the stadium where he played 7 of his 8 years with Arsenal while scoring 288 goals for the club. But then the directors move on to other stock themes. While the film discusses Henry’s upbringing (he talks about his dad as a major influence) and the beginnings of his career (Monaco where he met Arsene Wenger and Juventus, where he did not do so well), this is done with no actual footage, except a few still photographs. Oh, and I don't remember any reference to that handball goal that assured France's qualification to the 2010 World Cup in South Africa. This all adds up to an unsatisfying viewing experience which actually does a disservice to Henry’s legacy.
Unfortunately “Thierry Henry 1:1” is proof of what happens when the marketing men make films about football. Sadly most football "documentaries" nowadays look like this.
Here’s the trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-h-sc7pu5OI
* This is an edited version of a post that first appeared on our futbol tumblr, Football is a Country.
The rains down in Africa
Why is Toto’s ‘Africa,” a song with ridiculous lyrics, so popular with everyone? It has to be the melody and the hook.
No wonder Winnie Mandela objected to this
The film “Winnie Mandela” is what happens when you combine bad history and bad filmmaking.
Like a showbiz Muammar Gaddafi
The contradictions and tensions in pop legend Michael Jackson’s relationship with the African continent.
Tuesday morning quarterbacking*
The meaningless football tournaments of the summer--mostly to the benefit of sponsors--are thankfully now over. Club football calendars from around the world have been synched (mainly to please European club owners), so this weekend was basically the start of the 2013/2014 season. This is also the first time North American fans of the English Premier League can watch every game. With the opening weekend out of the way, we can safely say NBC's off to a good start--no one misses Eric Wynalda and Warren Bartlett or FOX's plastic studio, but Piers Morgan as a guest host? And what's with underestimating the football knowledge of American-based fans or presenting supporting a club is like picking different kinds of cereal? At least NBC have great commercials.
Not stitched together
This week’s Weekend Music Break, no. 50, includes a homage to the 34 striking miners murdered by South African police in August 2012.
When Basquiat went to Africa
In 1988, Basquiat traveled to Cote d’Ivoire, anticipating “very unsophisticated” Africans would see his art. That’s not what happened.
Three Books on Nelson Mandela
The American public radio network, NPR, asked me, in anticipation of Nelson Mandela’s birthday, to recommend 3 books its listeners could read on his life and legacy.
After the World Cup is gone
The book, “Africa’s World Cup,” is a valuable source for thinking more deeply about the meanings and legacies of the 2010 edition of the competition hosted in South Africa.
After Mandela
Nelson Mandela would recognize himself in young protesters for whom freedom has been postponed and view South Africa’s government as an obstacle.
Rick Ross is a Country
Rick Ross has since deleted a tweet about landing “in the beautiful country of Africa.” He deserved all the scorn. He’s been to three African countries already and should know.
The new and improved Africa is a Country is here
After weeks of promising you a new design, we’re back with a brand-new and improved blog. This is a big day for us.
Africa is a Country is getting a makeover
If you wondering what this stripped down design on the blog is all about, we're getting a new look and will be back soon. Meanwhile, you can visit or sign up to our Facebook and Twitter pages till then or stare at this pic of me chasing some kind of pheasant (UPDATE: Neelika says it is an Egyptian goose) in Kirstenbosch Botanical Gardens in Cape Town a few years long time ago.
The BBC’s standards of journalism when it comes to South Africa
Read it here. The piece is by longtime foreign correspondent John Simpson.
The main claims of the piece (and a documentary broadcast in the UK on Sunday night) are that the white poor number about 400,000 (that would be about 10% of the white population), that there are 80 "white squatter camps" situated around the capital Pretoria, and that there's a deliberate attempt on the part of the new government to neglect whites. These reports usually add attacks on white farmers into the mix as if there are direct links between these phenomena. And the BBC did that too. It's a mashup of all the nonsense Afriforum (and its allies like Solidarity) peddles to whichever local or foreign journalists care to listen. In most of these articles and "documentaries" white poverty is exaggerated and treated as unnatural. All of this is, of course, propaganda and fits in well with the attempts at inventing history or the new victim discourse among white South Africans lapped up by foreign media.
We were discussing writing a lengthy post pointing out how reports about white poverty in South Africa seem to all use the same photographs, visit the same "white squatter camp" over and over again, and pretend or imply that all black people are now middle class (the real scandal in South Africa is of course black poverty), among others, but then we remembered there is enough evidence out there the BBC could have consulted.
Like the fact that white South Africans are doing just as well--actually way better than expected--since the end of Apartheid (the most recent study to confirm this comes from the South African Institute of Race Relations, an institute not known for its support either for the liberation struggle or their love for the current ruling party) and CEOs and managers are still majority white. As for conditions on farms, read this. Finally, there's the the article by Africa Check, a South African website doing just that: fact checking. They systematically refute the falsehoods of the BBC report and concluded: "The claim that 400,000 whites are living in squatter camps is grossly inaccurate. If that were the case, it would mean that roughly ten percent of South Africa’s 4.59-million whites were living in abject poverty. Census figures suggest that only a tiny fraction of the white population – as little as 7,754 households – are affected."
The spectacle of Ernst Roets, an Afriforum leader, and a representative from one of Afriforum's partners, Solidarity, suddenly claiming they can't say where those statistics originate, is also something to behold. Word is Roets is drafting a reply made up of more made up statistics.
There's a certain amount of irony at play here also that Africa Check needed to be prompted by a BBC report to refute the stats that Afriforum, Afrikaner Genocide and other white apocalypse organizations have been poisoning the public debate with for a good ten years now.
But back to the BBC, which generally serves up contextual and well-researched reporting on South Africa: They do slip up occasionally when it comes to that country. Just recently the BBC presented FW de Klerk, the last white leader of South Africa, who as recently as last year still defended the moral basis for Apartheid, as an "analyst" of postapartheid South Africa. (And after watching it, I am still trying to figure out whether Peter Hain's recent "documentary" film is really about the people of Marikana--as it is marketed--or about Peter Hain?)
It seems unlikely the BBC will apologize over this and we doubt it will be pressured by its viewers and readers judging by the online comments on the story or how the story was circulated on the web (sites like Huffington Post republished it without any critical commentary) or shared as truth on Twitter and Facebook.
* BTW, the BBC is not the only "global news" operator that draws on Afriforum and its alliance-partners for research or analysis. At the outset of the Marikana mine massacre in August last year where police murdered 34 miners in cold blood, Al Jazeera turned to Solidarity for comment and analysis.
Like the fact that white South Africans are doing just as well--actually way better than expected--since the end of Apartheid (the most recent study to confirm this comes from the South African Institute of Race Relations, an institute not known for its support either for the liberation struggle or their love for the current ruling party) and CEOs and managers are still majority white. As for conditions on farms, read this. Finally, there's the the article by Africa Check, a South African website doing just that: fact checking. They systematically refute the falsehoods of the BBC report and concluded: "The claim that 400,000 whites are living in squatter camps is grossly inaccurate. If that were the case, it would mean that roughly ten percent of South Africa’s 4.59-million whites were living in abject poverty. Census figures suggest that only a tiny fraction of the white population – as little as 7,754 households – are affected."
The spectacle of Ernst Roets, an Afriforum leader, and a representative from one of Afriforum's partners, Solidarity, suddenly claiming they can't say where those statistics originate, is also something to behold. Word is Roets is drafting a reply made up of more made up statistics.
There's a certain amount of irony at play here also that Africa Check needed to be prompted by a BBC report to refute the stats that Afriforum, Afrikaner Genocide and other white apocalypse organizations have been poisoning the public debate with for a good ten years now.
But back to the BBC, which generally serves up contextual and well-researched reporting on South Africa: They do slip up occasionally when it comes to that country. Just recently the BBC presented FW de Klerk, the last white leader of South Africa, who as recently as last year still defended the moral basis for Apartheid, as an "analyst" of postapartheid South Africa. (And after watching it, I am still trying to figure out whether Peter Hain's recent "documentary" film is really about the people of Marikana--as it is marketed--or about Peter Hain?)
It seems unlikely the BBC will apologize over this and we doubt it will be pressured by its viewers and readers judging by the online comments on the story or how the story was circulated on the web (sites like Huffington Post republished it without any critical commentary) or shared as truth on Twitter and Facebook.
* BTW, the BBC is not the only "global news" operator that draws on Afriforum and its alliance-partners for research or analysis. At the outset of the Marikana mine massacre in August last year where police murdered 34 miners in cold blood, Al Jazeera turned to Solidarity for comment and analysis.