No abstract

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.

Recent scholarship discussing the ‘federal moment’ in world history after 1945 has re-examined alternatives to the nation-state in the years of decolonization, arguing against any inevitable transition from empire to nation. This article focuses on the case of East Africa, where federation seemed an attractive and likely prospect by 1963, yet never came to pass. Here, the politics of federation should be understood as a constitutive part of the contested nation-state-making process, rather than a viable alternative to it. For the leaders who initiated the politics of federation in the 1960s, regional unity promised the further centralization of power and a means of defeating ‘tribalist’ opposition. For their opponents, federation was seized on as a means of promoting the autonomy of provinces or kingdoms within a larger federal unit. Ultimately, regionalist aspiration was inseparable from national politics, and negotiations among the leaders of East African states demanded the definition of national interests which divided states rather than united them. Such conclusions suggest that historians of the federal moment might more productively focus on the functions of federalist discourse in the making of nation-states rather than debating the viability of federalist projects.

No abstract

The media in Zambia have been in a state of uncertainty since Zambia reinstated democratic governance in the early 1990s. Despite promising initial steps to deregulate the media that started under President Chiluba's government in the mid-1990s, achieving these objectives in successive years has proved difficult. Successive governments have exhibited increasing aversion towards free and independent media, instead increasing efforts to regulate. This is significant, because comparisons with Kaunda's autocratic era before 1991 cast the state in a friendlier light towards the media, defying normative theories. After both the Media Ethics Council of Zambia and Zambia Media Ethics Council (ZAMEC) failed as self-regulatory mechanisms in the mid to late 2000s, current state efforts have turned to create a hybrid statutory self-regulatory framework. This is a challenge because Zambia's democracy has come under pressure from increasing political intolerance. Furthermore, while media professionals support the idea of regulation to strengthen professionalism, they often disagree on the value of statutory self-regulation and its implications. This study used the In-Depth Interview approach on 23 media professionals and documentary analysis to sketch the history and future implications of media regulation efforts in Zambia. Results show a checkered past but present an even more complicated future. The history of the Independent Broadcasting Authority shows that the proposed statutory self-regulatory framework presents more challenges to the media than ever before. This paper aims to contribute to global media studies and specifically the problems of regulation, the state, and media freedom in an African context.