THE EFFECTS OF WORLD INFORMATION FLOW IMBALANCE ON THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES (A CASE STUDY OF NIGERIA)

1.0BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

The world information flow controversy is perhaps the most topical issue in international communities today.

This global controversy is basically about the demand by the south for a change in the present pattern of information flow between it and the north. The south also knows that the third world or under developed or developing countries of the world contends that there is gross unbalance both in quality and quantity, in global information flow between the south and the north, also known as the first world countries of the world. 
This unbalance according to the south, has placed it at the receiving end as developing countries are daily bombarded with information and other media materials which do not meet their development needs and more importantly tend to debase  their culture and portray them as inferior in the eyes of all. 

The south, therefore rejects free flow of information in which there is an overwhelming amount of information flowing from a small number of industrialized countries into the numerous countries of the developing world. This rejection is partly rooted in the negative effects or consequences of this type of flow on cultures of the third world countries cultural imperialism  or synchronization could be a resultant effect of the unhindered and unbalance global information flow.

Supporting the south’s line of argument, Opubor (1986:4) says, it is a very difficult state of affair indeed that a small group of people concentrated in four countries can arrogate onto themselves and preempt the management of our image of the world through controlling what is called news. Expressing similar views, Uche (1996:4) states, the western media’s on sought against Africa and the third world has continued to better and dent the image of the people of the southern hemisphere who are protracted as lesser beings. The demand for a new world information and communication order (NWICO) which Nigeria subscribes to is therefore borne out of the design to change the present pattern of the world information flow and also free her citizens form being passive receivers of distorted and biased information.

Historically, the new world information and communication orders debate has its root in the 1976 UN declaration on freedom of information. The disagreement stated in 1948 when Russia and her Allies opposed the idea of freedom of information at the Genva convention. The earliest quantitative study on it was the international press institute’s 1953 study of which suggested that there was unbalance the global news flow.

The debate gathered momentum in the 1960’s and 1990’s the united national educational scientific and cultural organizations involvement began precisely in 1970 when the issue was first tabled at its general conference. Two years later, the majority of its delayed resolved that there was potential danger of global news flow unbalance.

In 1974, the UNESCO conference approved a declaration on the new international economic order (NIEO) several other efforts were made before UNESCO in 1977 appointed a – 1b – man committee of communication experts headed by an Irish diplomat, san Macbrige to study the world communication problems and make recommendations. The Macbrige report was submitted in 1980. the report stated in no uncertain terms that there is unbalance domination is a reality of this unbalanced (Okenna, 1993:94) This did not go down well with some western countries. However the UNESCO chairman then Senegalese Amadon Mahtar M’Bow defended it stoutly, arguing that freedom of information in one directions freedom and liberty are not the monopolies of any group.

The argument however did not impress the west, as united states of America (USA) pulled out of UNESCO, in 1985 Britain and Singapore followed suit, maintaining that Nwico declaration was an endemic hostility towards the institution of free press, free market and above all individuals human rights. UNESCO, however remains unmoved and insisted that NWICO will bring about “more justice, more equity reciprocity information exchange, less dependence in commutation flow less downwards diffusion of message, more self reliance and cultural identity, more benefit for all man kind” because of the complex nature of this debate and the opposing stand of the different ideologies involvement the debatee has consumed many man hours and according to Juan Somavia, “This might lead to the wars major conflict among nations after the world wars.