The media’s portrayal of Africa has long been dominated by persistent stereotypes. This report explores the economic consequences of such biased reporting by examining the relationship between media bias in election coverage and its impact on financial flows. Using a mixed methods approach, the study quantifies media bias by comparing African countries to their peers and assesses how this bias correlates with sovereign bond yields or interest rates, a key financial indicator. The research analyses this correlation both quantitatively across election periods and qualitatively through case studies, with the ultimate aim to measure the economic impact of misrepresented media coverage on Africa.

Our findings show that African countries receive increased media attention during general elections, with a disproportionate focus on negative issues such as violence and election fraud. This emphasis is more pronounced compared to coverage of non-African countries with similar political risk conditions, resulting in higher negative sentiment and bias scores for African nations. Notably, the term “violence” is highly associated with Africa in media coverage, particularly in election-related headlines.

Our analysis further established a clear connection between media sentiment and investor perception of risk, which is closely tied to sovereign credit risk. Negative media coverage increases a country’s perceived risk, which leads to higher borrowing costs. Conversely, positive media sentiment is correlated with a lower risk profile and reduced bond yields. Yet, this study found that African countries are unjustifiably perceived as higher risk by international investors, leading to significantly higher credit costs compared to countries with similar political and socio-economic conditions. Building on this key finding, we analysed a group of African countries to quantify the estimated additional costs the continent incurs on loans due to biased media coverage.

We acknowledge that this study has limitations in fully capturing the broader impact, as it focuses on one specific element—how risk sentiment influences the cost of debt. Nonetheless, it is reasonable to assume that the other important drivers of development finance, such as tourism, are similarly impacted by risk sentiment, which is heavily shaped by global media narratives. We have also explored foreign direct investment (FDI) and stock flows as key financial indicators that may also correlate with media bias and reflect investor sentiment. The detailed findings on these indicators are presented in Annexure.

• African countries receive more media attention during elections, but with a disproportionate focus on negative issues like violence and election fraud.
• Africa receives higher negative sentiment and bias scores in media compared to non-African countries with similar political risks.
• “Violence” is highly associated with Africa in election coverage, especially in headlines.
• Negative media sentiment increases perceived risk, leading to higher borrowing costs for African countries.

• African nations are unjustifiably seen as higher risk by investors, resulting in higher credit costs compared to similar non-African countries.
• The full impact of media bias extends beyond debt costs and likely affects other sectors like tourism, shaped by negative risk sentiment in media.
• Thus, Africa could be losing up to $4.2 billion annually in inflated interest payments due to biased media coverage.