Aggrey Nyondwa critiques the Western media’s sporadic and superficial coverage of the ongoing conflict in the DRC, emphasising the need for more sustained, ethical reporting that acknowledges the roles of international actors in perpetuating the crisis.

You’ve probably seen the recent headlines about the ongoing conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). For some of you, this might be the first time you’re hearing about it in any real detail—despite the fact that this crisis has been raging for over 30 years. It’s not that you didn’t care before—I assume you did—but the media didn’t care enough to make sure you knew. This is a classic example of how the Western press sporadically covers and frames humanitarian crises that seem “too far away.”

For many Congolese, this war isn’t breaking news—it’s the life they’ve known for the last three decades. Over a million people have fled to refugee camps in Uganda and other neighbouring countries, while about 7 million remain internally displaced. You’d think a humanitarian crisis of this scale would keep international media glued to the situation in Congo, but Nop! Since 2016, the DRC has frequently ranked among the world’s most forgotten crises.

In my MSc thesis two years ago, I examined how Western media (using the UK as a case study) frame and perpetuate forgotten crises, including the DRC. I discovered that one of the major frames the media uses to send these crises into oblivion is episodic framing—a pattern where crises only make headlines during brief spikes in violence, refugee movements, or when a Western celebrity visits. Unfortunately, the current media hysteria over Congo feels like another one of these short-lived moments of attention before the news cycle moves on again.

Why is the DRC so often ignored?

Two major problems drive this cycle of neglect. First is the way the media decides what’s “newsworthy” and what’s not. Conventional new values like timeliness, prominence, conflict, proximity, and oddity/sensation mostly feed the capitalistic media model because stories covered based on these criteria guarantee viewership, sales, and clicks. If a crisis like the one in the DRC doesn’t fit these arbitrary benchmarks, it’s ignored or, at the very best, cramped at the back of the other stories.

The second issue is the hierarchy of place and life. Media coverage is not neutral; it reflects racial, cultural, and geopolitical biases. Between July 2023 and July 2024, The New York Times published only 52 articles on the DRC but ran 2,969 articles on Ukraine. This disparity highlights the uncomfortable reality that some lives—and some conflicts—are deemed more important than others.

And this is not just about the work of the media. There is a cost to this neglect. The imbalance influences how aid is distributed, how policies are shaped, and how much international support a crisis receives. While the cameras looked away, the M23 rebels gained strength, seized more land, hundreds of lives were lost, and thousands displaced. It’s only the recent capture of Goma, the largest city in eastern Congo, that has reignited media interest. Could this escalation have been prevented if the world had paid attention earlier? Maybe.

Getting the framing right: Who is responsible for the DRC conflict?

Even when the Western press does cover the DRC, its framing often oversimplifies the conflict. In the past, reports have described the violence as an internal power struggle between warring militias, ignoring external actors’ roles. This kind of narrative deters Western audiences from engaging, as it frames the conflict as distant, chaotic, and inevitable.

However, recent coverage has finally begun to acknowledge a crucial detail: M23 is Rwanda-backed. This framing shift is significant for two reasons:

Firstly, it exposes Western complicity. Rwanda, under President Paul Kagame, a close ally of the West, has been heavily implicated in fuelling the DRC conflict. By causing havoc in the mineral-rich eastern Congo, Rwanda secures a path for itself and its allies to huge mineral deposits. No wonder they–not long ago–signed a mineral deal with the EU, and their deep ties with the UK government became evident when the UK sought to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, including those that might be fleeing this very conflict. Rwanda also uses profits from this loot to buy expensive promotion space at top European football clubs like PSG, Arsenal and Bayern Munich.

Secondly, shifting the frame would also shift the burden of responsibility to the right place. Western reporting on forgotten crises often attributes blame to local governments, painting them as corrupt, violent, or incompetent. While these dynamics exist, the bigger picture is often more complex, involving powerful international actors enabling conflict for economic or political gain. Failing to highlight these deeper causes allows the international community to remain indifferent, believing these crises are merely the result of internal chaos rather than systemic exploitation.

Rethinking news values and ethical reporting

The recent surge in coverage of the DRC crisis is welcome. However, for this attention to have a lasting impact, the media must rethink its approach to humanitarian reporting. This, for a start, would mean moving beyond the traditional news values of timeliness and sensationalism as they have been compromised by racial and commercial biases. Instead, the guiding principle should be justice. If people are suffering, regardless of who, when or where, the world should know—period!

There also ought to be a shift from Episodic to Thematic Reporting. Instead of brief reports triggered by fresh violence, the media should provide sustained coverage that provides a deeper context and explores the structural and historical factors driving humanitarian crises. This means critically examining the role of international actors like governments, corporations, and institutions in perpetuating instability and holding them accountable.

The neglect of the DRC crisis is not inevitable. But as long as the media dictates which conflicts matter and which can be forgotten, places like Congo will remain in the shadows—until the next eruption of violence forces them, briefly, into the light again.

This post was originally published on LSE’s International Development blog and is republished with thanks. It gives the views of the author and not the position of the Media@LSE blog, of the International Development blog, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.

Featured image credit: MONUSCO Urubatt armored vehicles patroling streets of Goma for civil protection. MONUSCO/Sylvain Liechti via commons.wikimedia.org.