About the MSI
[7]
IREX designed the MSI to measure the strength and viability of any country's media sector. The MSI considers all the factors that contribute to a media system—the quality of journalism, effectiveness of management, the legal environment supporting freedom of the press, and more—to arrive at scores on a scale ranging between 0 and 4. These scores represent the strength of the media sector components and can be analyzed over time to chart progress (or regression) within a country. Additionally, countries or regions may be compared to one another. IREX currently conducts the MSI in 80 countries, and began studying Africa in 2006.
MSI Overview [8] | Africa [9] | Asia [10] | Europe & Eurasia [11] | Middle East & North Africa [12]
MSI Methodology [13]
Download Complete Benin Chapter (PDF): 2012 [14] | 2010 [15] | 2009 [16] | 2008 [17] | 2006/07 [18] | 2006/7 (français) [19]
MSI Benin - 2012 Introduction
Overall Country Score: 2.16
Compared to previous years, in 2012 the Beninese media landscape did not see major upheavals. The major concern was that the High Authority for Radio, Television, and the Media (HAAC) seemed to enter a more repressive phase in its approach to “sanitizing” the media. The public media regulatory authority raised the sanctions it imposes against certain newspapers by several notches, ranging from banning publication for a minimum of five days to permanent bans.
From late 2011 to early 2012, some daily newspapers were handed publication bans of limited duration; The Independent was banned for five days and The New Gallery for 10 days. Three others were permanently banned: Le Béninois Libéré, L’Actu Express, and Aujourd’hui au Bénin.
At the same time, HAAC issued individual sanctions against five media professionals, who were forbidden for life from practicing journalism in Benin. The first three sanctions came after HAAC received complaints of violations of the code of ethics, and the other two after the courts had found two press owners guilty of attempted fraud and sentenced them to six months in prison. The HAAC Advisory Council, which also took up the case, stated that it considered the prison sentence extremely excessive.
In the print media, half a dozen titles debuted, adding to the existing plethora of newspapers. As for radio and television, the government’s status quo policy is to deny HAAC the leave to assign new frequencies. Some observers link this reticence to the authorities’ fear of losing control over the media.
The national radio and public print media are trying to provide quality service to the population. By contrast, the public television channel, described by some as “government television,” is completely and without reservation in the hands of the current government. Its top managers are not embarrassed to show their support for the head of state. The time allotted for on-air coverage of any criticism of authorities is reduced to the bare minimum. This state of affairs has not failed to alarm the public. The opposition political parties have already complained more than once to HAAC without success, though the regulatory authority has made much-appreciated attempts to call the national television management to order.
Despite these problems, freedom of expression remains vibrant in Benin, thanks especially to the private-sector media, which provide a plurality of news sources. Some occasional incidents of intimidation have not succeeded in silencing journalism professionals. In an interview with the private television station Channel 3 on August 1 (National Day), President Thomas Yayi Boni suggested that he could “do harm” to the “little” journalists from the station that insult him, but his comments resulted only in boosting tenfold the enthusiasm for criticizing the actions of Benin’s rulers. The fact is that in 2012, no journalist doing his or her job ethically was convicted of any crime.