By Isabella Agyakwa
For individuals, organisations and countries, reputation can open doors, create opportunities and inspire confidence. That is why businesses invest heavily in branding, public relations and corporate identity, while countries spend enormous resources shaping how they are perceived by the rest of the world. Once a negative perception takes root, rebuilding trust can be difficult.
This is particularly important for African countries, where international perceptions have, for decades, been shaped disproportionately by stories of conflict, poverty, corruption, disease and instability.
Before groundbreaking programmes such as the BBC’s Focus on Africa, international coverage of the continent was often limited and, in many instances, viewed through a predominantly Western and colonial lens. Africa was too frequently presented not as a continent of diverse societies, cultures, economies and ambitions, but as a backdrop for European interests and a collection of problems requiring attention.
The late Komla Dumor spent much of his career challenging that narrative. At the BBC, Komla championed authentic, balanced and robust coverage of Africa. He understood that telling Africa’s story could not be limited to war, poverty and despair. The continent was also home to entrepreneurs, innovators, scientists, business leaders, artists, athletes and ordinary people building meaningful lives. Through programmes such as Focus on Africa and Africa Business Report, he used global platforms to tell those stories and give African voices the international audience they deserved. That philosophy is worth revisiting today.
When reporting hurt the country
It appears that sections of Ghana’s media may sometimes lose sight of this responsibility. Following the 2026 Commonwealth Games in Glasgow, a Ghanaian media house interviewed the Communications Director for Team Ghana, Charles Osei Asibey, about Ghana’s performance at the Games.
The interview was engaging, and it was entirely reasonable for journalists to ask about the welfare and whereabouts of members of the delegation. However, the conversation took an uncomfortable turn when the interviewers repeatedly pressed the issue of whether members of the team would return to Ghana.
The question itself is not necessarily problematic. Accountability and legitimate public interest are fundamental to journalism. The concern is what happens when a particular issue is repeatedly emphasised until it becomes the defining narrative.
Mr Asibey appeared to recognise this risk. He pointed out that Ghana had travelled to Scotland as a delegation and would return in the same manner. He also referenced the difficulty Ghana faced in securing media accreditation because of what happened in Australia, warning that Ghana had unnecessarily amplified the issue.
His point was simple but profound: when we repeatedly amplify narratives that damage confidence in our people, institutions or country, we can unintentionally close doors for ourselves.
The value of national image
Major global powers have long understood the importance of nation branding, public diplomacy and strategic communication. The United States, China, Japan and other influential countries have problems of their own. They experience crime, racism, political controversies, economic difficulties and other serious social challenges. Yet their international identities are rarely allowed to be defined exclusively by those problems.
The United States, for instance, has experienced mass shootings and serious debates about racism and public safety. These issues receive extensive coverage, as they should. But America’s global image is not exclusively associated with those problems. It is also associated with technology, universities, innovation, entertainment, entrepreneurship, scientific research and economic power.
China is associated with manufacturing, technology, infrastructure and economic transformation. Japan has cultivated an image strongly associated with technology, discipline, culture and innovation. This does not mean these countries conceal every negative event. Nor should Ghana or any other country attempt to do so.
A free press must investigate wrongdoing, expose corruption and hold public officials accountable but the issue is balance. A country’s legitimate problems should be reported, but they should not become the only story the world hears.
he responsibility does not rest with traditional media alone. Public figures and celebrities also possess enormous communication power. When Davido wore a “Bring Them Home” jacket highlighting schoolchildren and teachers kidnapped in Oyo State, his action generated an important debate.
Some saw it as powerful strategic communication: a globally recognised Nigerian drawing attention to insecurity and demanding action while others argued that such a public display could damage Nigeria’s international image by reinforcing perceptions of the country as unsafe.
Both perspectives deserve consideration. The larger lesson is that communication has consequences beyond the immediate objective. Country brands rely heavily on perceptions of safety, stability and opportunity. Those perceptions influence tourism, investment, business partnerships and even how foreign governments and institutions interact with a country.
Advocacy is necessary but so is an understanding of the wider consequences of the message being projected.
Lessons from Australian experience
The concerns surrounding Ghanaian sporting delegations provide another example. If international sporting bodies and foreign authorities begin to suspect that Ghanaian delegations may be used as opportunities for people to disappear abroad, future Ghanaian athletes, journalists and officials may face greater scrutiny.
That scrutiny can create genuine difficulties for innocent people. A narrative that repeatedly portrays Ghanaian travellers as potential absconders can affect accreditation, visas, invitations and opportunities for legitimate participants. This is why the media must be conscious of the difference between holding institutions accountable and reinforcing a damaging stereotype.
The National Science & Maths Quiz, alongside STEM initiatives undertaken by Ghana’s education and communications institutions, provides an opportunity to demonstrate the intellectual capacity of Ghanaian young people.
Ghana must never become a country where the media is expected to hide corruption, incompetence, crime or abuse simply because such stories might make the country look bad because that would be a dangerous misunderstanding of journalism. A strong country is not one that hides its problems. It is one that confronts them while also ensuring that its successes, potential and people are not forgotten.
The media can investigate corruption and still celebrate innovation, it can report insecurity and still promote tourism, it can question sporting authorities and still tell the stories of athletes who represent the country with distinction, it can hold government accountable and still tell the world about Ghanaian businesses creating jobs.
Ghana occupies a special place in Africa’s political and historical imagination. Its democratic credentials, relative political stability and the contributions of its forebears to Pan-Africanism have helped give the country a reputation that many other nations admire.
That reputation should not be taken for granted neither should it be destroyed in the name of generating sensational interviews, provocative headlines or viral content. Ghana needs journalism that is fearless enough to ask difficult questions but thoughtful enough to understand the consequences of the narratives it repeatedly amplifies. The country needs media professionals who understand that every story contributes, in some measure, to the picture the world forms of Ghana.
The most powerful way to protect Ghana’s image is not to pretend that the problems do not exist, but to ensure that the world sees the complete picture: a country willing to confront its weaknesses while confidently showcasing the extraordinary people and possibilities within it.
About The Author
