WHEN JOURNALISM REFUSES TO BOW: ARISE NEWS AND THE COURAGE TO ASK THE QUESTIONS OTHERS AVOID

Ask the government what it does not want to answer. Ask the opposition what it does not want to answer. Ask Ambazonian leaders what they do not want to answer. Ask military commanders what they do not want to answer. Ask diplomats what they do not want to answer. Ask religious leaders what they do not want to answer. And when the answer does not survive scrutiny, say so. When the powerful are wrong, say so. When the powerless are wrong, say so. When the evidence is uncertain, say that too. That is independence. That is credibility. That is journalism.

By Uchiba Nelson
With additional information from Timothy Enongene, Associate Editor-in-Chief, Independentist News

As Amazon associate this site earns from qualifying purchases

Its back to school. Shop from Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=back+to+school&i=specialty-aps&srs=217248077011&crid=2UB3ZEVCOPJI7&sprefix=Back%2Cspecialty-aps%2C404&linkCode=ll2&tag=njokings-20&linkId=6d04315eaaaef264a902c67303b1b42f&language=en_US&ref_=as_li_ss_tl

Yaoundé – September 8, 2026 – There are moments when journalism reminds the public why powerful people have always feared a free press. Not because journalists possess armies. Not because they control governments. Not because they command enormous wealth. But because a serious journalist possesses something power often finds more dangerous: the courage to ask the question that was not supposed to be asked. That is what makes some of the journalism coming from ARISE News worth watching.

ARISE describes itself as a global news channel with a strong focus on Africa. More importantly, its political programming regularly demonstrates something increasingly precious on the continent: the willingness to place politicians, government officials and other influential public figures under sustained questioning rather than merely handing them a microphone.

The significance is not that ARISE News is infallible. No serious media organisation is. The significance is the principle. Power must be questioned. A journalist is not employed to admire political office. A television studio should not become an extension of the government communications department. An interview is not a ceremonial reception for a minister. And a press conference should never become an exercise in helping powerful people escape accountability. Journalism exists precisely because official statements cannot always be taken as the final word. That distinction becomes especially important when one considers the media environment in La République du Cameroun.

Reporters Without Borders ranked Cameroon 133rd out of 180 countries in its 2026 World Press Freedom Index and described independent and critical reporting in the country as extremely difficult. Cameroon possesses a large and diverse media landscape, but the existence of hundreds of newspapers, radio stations and television channels does not automatically guarantee fearless journalism.

The deeper problem is what might be called selective courage. Some journalists can be extraordinarily aggressive when interviewing ordinary citizens, opposition politicians, activists or individuals without institutional protection. Their voices rise. Their questions become sharp. They demand evidence. They interrupt. They insist upon answers.

But place a powerful government official in the same chair and something remarkable can happen. The questions soften. The interruptions disappear. The follow-up questions evaporate. Contradictions that would have been aggressively challenged in another guest are allowed to pass almost untouched. That is where the credibility of journalism is ultimately tested.

Journalism is not a profession of convenient questions. It is a profession of uncomfortable truths. A journalist does not earn integrity by sounding courageous when the target is powerless. Integrity is demonstrated when the person across the table possesses the money, authority, connections, security apparatus or institutional influence capable of making the journalist’s life uncomfortable. That is why the ARISE model deserves attention.

When an interviewer refuses to be intimidated by political stature; when claims are challenged rather than merely broadcast; when the second question is more important than the first because the first answer was evasive—that is journalism performing one of its most important democratic functions. It reminds the public that political authority does not confer immunity from scrutiny.

CAMEROON’S JOURNALISM IS NOT MONOLITHIC

Fairness requires another point to be made. Cameroonian journalism is not monolithic. There are reporters, editors and independent outlets doing difficult work under challenging circumstances. Mimi Mefo Info, for example, publicly describes itself as an independent news network unaffiliated with government and operating with reporters inside Cameroon as well as structures outside the country.

Other journalists and platforms have also attempted to investigate controversial subjects despite political, economic and professional pressures. They deserve recognition when they do good journalism. But independence cannot simply be written on an organisation’s masthead. It must be demonstrated in the questions it is willing to ask. And from an Ambazonian perspective, the questions surrounding the conflict remain enormous.

Where is the sustained journalism interrogating the power behind the violence? Where are the relentless interviews asking why a conflict that began as a political crisis has continued for nearly a decade? Where are the journalists demanding answers about civilian deaths, military operations, arbitrary arrests, disappearances, displacement, destroyed communities and the political decisions that produced the catastrophe? Where is the sustained examination of the historical and constitutional grievances that preceded the armed conflict? Where are the interviews that seriously examine the competing narratives coming from Yaoundé and from advocates of Ambazonian independence? Where are the questions about accountability?

Human Rights Watch and other international organisations have documented grave abuses committed during the conflict by both armed separatist groups and Cameroonian security forces. That reality itself demands serious journalism. If separatist forces abuse civilians, journalists should investigate them. If government forces abuse civilians, journalists should investigate them. If political leaders distort history, journalists should challenge them. If activists make claims unsupported by evidence, journalists should challenge them too. The standard cannot change depending upon who is being interviewed. That is the test.

THE TEST IS SYMMETRY

Journalistic integrity is ultimately about symmetry. You cannot aggressively demand evidence from an Ambazonian representative while publishing a government allegation as though it were established fact. You cannot interrogate an opposition politician for twenty minutes and then allow a government minister to repeat prepared talking points without meaningful follow-up.

You cannot demand accountability from armed groups while treating the conduct of state security forces as beyond serious examination. And neither should journalists automatically accept the claims of separatist organisations merely because those organisations oppose the government. Evidence must remain evidence regardless of who benefits from it. That is journalism. Anything else risks becoming narrative management.

This is also why expressions such as “crumb eaters,” however understandable as manifestations of public frustration, should not become substitutes for serious criticism of journalists. An insult can be dismissed. Evidence is much harder to escape. The stronger response to bad journalism is not name-calling. Place the broadcast beside the facts. Place yesterday’s headline beside today’s evidence. Place the question asked of an opposition figure beside the question asked of a minister. Place the standards applied to Ambazonian actors beside those applied to Yaoundé. Then allow the public to judge. Documented inconsistency is more devastating than insult.

JOURNALISM IN A WAR OF NARRATIVES

For Ambazonians living inside the conflict zone or throughout the diaspora, these questions are not academic. The struggle is not simply about territory. It is also about information, memory, legitimacy, history, constitutional interpretation and the right of a people to tell their own story. Every conflict contains a battle over language. Who is a “terrorist”? Who is a “freedom fighter”? What constitutes a “security operation”? When does an arrest become arbitrary detention? When does a military action become collective punishment? When does advocacy become propaganda? Who determines which history enters the television studio and which history remains outside the door? These are precisely the questions journalists must approach carefully.

A conflict cannot be understood simply by reproducing the vocabulary of whichever government controls the broadcasting licenses. Nor can it be understood by automatically adopting the vocabulary of those opposing that government. Journalism must do something more difficult. Investigate.Ask for evidence. Compare accounts. Consult history. Question assumptions. Challenge contradictions.Return to unanswered questions.And above all, refuse to allow political power to determine which questions may be asked.

DO NOT BECOME ANYONE’S MICROPHONE

That is why the lesson from ARISE News should not be reduced to admiration for a particular television station. The larger lesson is institutional. Africa needs journalism that understands that access to powerful people is not the same thing as holding powerful people accountable. Being photographed with ministers is not journalism. Receiving exclusive government statements is not necessarily journalism. Sitting across from a president, governor or minister becomes journalism only when the reporter remains willing to ask what that official would prefer not to answer.

The same principle applies to opposition leaders. And it applies to Ambazonian leaders. Do not become the microphone of government. Do not become the microphone of the opposition. Do not become the microphone of the diaspora. Do not become the microphone of armed movements. Become something far more valuable—and far more dangerous to every political establishment:

BECOME THE MICROPHONE OF ACCOUNTABILITY.

Ask the government what it does not want to answer. Ask the opposition what it does not want to answer. Ask Ambazonian leaders what they do not want to answer. Ask military commanders what they do not want to answer. Ask diplomats what they do not want to answer. Ask religious leaders what they do not want to answer. And when the answer does not survive scrutiny, say so. When the powerful are wrong, say so. When the powerless are wrong, say so. When the evidence is uncertain, say that too. That is independence. That is credibility. That is journalism.

So, to the journalists at ARISE News who continue to ask uncomfortable questions: Keep asking them. Do not become comfortable. Do not allow access to power to become friendship with power. Do not allow political intimidation to determine the boundaries of legitimate inquiry. And do not forget that sometimes the most important question in journalism is the one everyone in the room knows the powerful person does not want to hear. Africa does not need more journalists who know how to protect powerful people from difficult questions. Africa needs journalists with the courage to ask the difficult questions in the first place.

As Amazon associate this site earns from qualifying purchases

Its back to school. Shop from Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=back+to+school&i=specialty-aps&srs=217248077011&crid=2UB3ZEVCOPJI7&sprefix=Back%2Cspecialty-aps%2C404&linkCode=ll2&tag=njokings-20&linkId=6d04315eaaaef264a902c67303b1b42f&language=en_US&ref_=as_li_ss_tl

Uchiba Nelson
With additional information from Timothy Enongene, Associate Editor-in-Chief, Independentist News