Gillian Schutte is a film-maker, social justice and race-justice activist and public intellectual. Picture: Supplied
By Gillian Schutte
A so-called study, authored by Dani Madrid-Morales, Herman Wasserman, and Saifuddin Ahmed, and titled “The Geopolitics of Disinformation: Worldviews, Media Consumption and the Adoption of Global Strategic Disinformation Narratives,” has recently surfaced in The Conversation—a platform that prides itself on being progressive and academically credible.
It is headlined with the brazen claim: "Chinese and Russian Disinformation Flourishes in Some African Countries – Anti-US Sentiment Helps It Take Hold." This piece of “research” pushes the exhausted idea of an "information disorder" allegedly rampant across Africa, painting Africans as somehow more prone to being manipulated by Russian or Chinese “disinformation.” Stripping away its academic pretensions, what’s revealed is a rehashed colonial narrative, an attempt to pathologise anti-colonial and anti-imperialist thought and dismiss it as the result of foreign meddling.
The authors’ purport to be addressing some imagined “knowledge gap” left by Western-centric research while actually using this rhetoric to cover up decades of documented Western interference in African affairs. The study frames any challenge to Western hegemony as evidence of foreign influence, completely ignoring that Africans are fully aware of their own histories of exploitation and betrayal. These academics, ironically enough, embody the very “foreign influence” they claim to expose.
The foundation of their “study” relies on the flawed assumption that only Western-aligned “fact-checking” organisations hold the monopoly on truth, while it conveniently dismisses the lived experiences and critical perspectives of those surveyed. The researchers, under their guise of neutrality, ignore the fact that many Africans view NATO’s expansion as a provocation and are acutely aware of how Western-imposed sanctions on Russia have triggered global food and energy crises. By brushing aside these viewpoints as mere “narratives” concocted by Moscow or Beijing, they avoid engaging with a broader range of credible research and selectively quote sources that align with Western geopolitical aims, disregarding the wide spectrum of international scholarship and opinion that challenges the dominant Western stance on issues like Ukraine, Taiwan, and Hong Kong. What emerges is less a piece of genuine research than a clumsy effort to discredit any deviation from the Western-approved line.
The authors use a string of loaded questions to manufacture answers that neatly fit into a Western narrative. It asks whether respondents believe statements like “The war in Ukraine is a consequence of NATO’s expansion in Eastern Europe” or “Sanctions against Russia are the main cause for the current food and energy crises,” only to then categorise these perspectives as Kremlin disinformation. Questions about Taiwan and Hong Kong are framed in a way that prompts predictable responses, which are then wielded to undermine any viewpoint not aligned with American interests. Instead of seeking to understand genuine public opinion, the study focuses on creating evidence to support a pre-existing narrative of Western superiority. The study's authors ignore why countries like South Africa and Ethiopia are sceptical of US propaganda, perhaps because they have seen through decades of lies and double standards and are no longer swayed by another round of hollow rhetoric from a distant empire. It is satisfying, as a South African, to see that we continue to challenge the West’s nonsense.
This “study” serves as a cover for the broader agenda of US-funded entities such as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which pretends to promote democratic values while furthering US geopolitical interests. Posing as impartial academic research, it finances countless projects and initiatives across Africa, all intended to silence any voices that question or challenge US global control.
Publishing studies like this, with no regard for local contexts or sovereignties, reeks of colonial arrogance, implying that Africans cannot determine truth from falsehood without Western guidance, re-inscribes the same paternalistic thinking that marked the colonial era and dismissed African voices as irrational or uninformed. The message to African nations is blunt: stray from the Western narrative, and you will be subjected to scrutiny, delegitimisation, and economic punishment. This is nothing less than cultural and intellectual colonisation, wielded by the United States through its web of NGOs, academic partnerships, and digital media campaigns.
US propaganda in Africa has always been present, but its tactics have become more sophisticated and covert over time. The United States relies on a range of strategies to impose a worldview that suits its interests, aiming to undermine any alternative narratives. Using cultural diplomacy, Hollywood soft power, and funding media outlets and academic research, the US seeks to control how global events are perceived and discussed across the continent. These US-centric discourses infiltrate digital media, presented as education or development, with the goal of shaping public opinion to favour American interests. This relentless effort reshapes public discourse, threatening Africa's cultural sovereignty and right to self-determination, and the recent US-backed soft coup in South Africa, accompanied by a well-funded DA media blitz, is a glaring example of this phenomenon in action.
Africa must urgently draw inspiration from the West African countries, especially those in the Sahel region, that have taken decisive steps to reclaim their sovereignty from foreign influence, including the US-based NGOs, and seize greater control over their resources and political systems. Nations like Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso are lighting the way for a new era of African independence, taking bold measures to dismantle the network of foreign NGOs that masquerade as agents of aid and democracy but, in reality, serve as tools of Western power. Through the act of exposing and expelling these so-called humanitarian groups, these countries are not only rejecting American soft power but also laying the foundation to reclaim their resources and wealth.
Niger, a nation plundered for its uranium while its people remain in poverty, has demanded the exit of foreign troops and NGOs that have long meddled in its internal affairs. The country’s leadership recognises that reclaiming their resources must begin with dismantling the propaganda that portrays Western exploitation as charity. The new military government knows that these NGOs, funded by Western governments, have been operating to control public discourse, quash dissent, and keep the resources flowing out of Africa and into Western pockets. Their expulsion marks an essential step toward reclaiming Niger’s wealth and future.
Mali and Burkina Faso are following Niger's lead, rejecting the constraints of dependency and pushing back against the suffocating grip of the Western narrative. Leaders in these countries, having watched the hollow promises of development aid for years, understand that true self-determination cannot be found in Washington, Paris, or London but begins with breaking the hold of all forms of colonial control, including dismantling the propaganda machines these NGOs represent. Cutting these ties is the only path to rebuilding their nations on their own terms, reclaiming their natural wealth, and ensuring it benefits their people instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors.
This growing resistance is Africa’s stand to reclaim its intellectual, spiritual, and material autonomy from those who seek to preserve a neo-colonial order under the pretence of democracy and development. Many African nations are no longer willing to be manipulated or lectured by external powers that pretend to offer support while continuing to undermine their sovereignty. Expelling these foreign NGOs marks the beginning of a movement that challenges the West's self-serving claims to truth, exposing the hypocrisy of those who speak of human rights while profiting from human suffering. Africa will reclaim its resources and wealth while tearing down the propaganda machines that have dictated its fate for too long.
Despite this resistance, US propaganda in Africa continues to escalate, demanding that more African countries take up the challenge and confront this scourge head-on. Studies like the one by Madrid-Morales, Wasserman, and Ahmed, parading as neutral research, must be exposed for the charade they are. These academics, affiliated with institutions like the University of Houston, the University of Stellenbosch, and Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, are the very foreign forces they claim to expose, positioning themselves as the new colonial overseers, cloaked in the guise of academic objectivity, while propagating the imperial agendas they pretend to critique. They are the latest face of colonialism—paternalistic gatekeepers of the intellectual realm, leading the charge to suppress independent thought in Africa.
Hopefully, in time, history will consign these information disordered studies to the trashcan of shameless propaganda—where they rightfully belong.
* Gillian Schutte is a film-maker, social justice and race-justice activist and public intellectual.
** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media.