What is the genuine cost of propaganda in public governance? At what point does message management become manipulation? And who truly benefits when policy advice is filtered through a partisan lens, rather than a national one?
These are uncomfortable questions. Yet they are urgent and necessary for those who advise political office holders. This is so around the world. But it is particularly so across the African continent. The stakes there are often existential. Also, the margins for policy error in Africa is dangerously narrow.
A Brief History of Spin: From Subtle Persuasion to Statecraft Strategy
Propaganda is not new. Its origins stretch back centuries. From war-time morale boosting and religious evangelism, to colonial indoctrination. But in the 20th century, spin-doctoring matured into a refined political tool. From Joseph Goebbels in Nazi Germany to Edward Bernays in America, the “father of public relations”, propaganda became institutionalized as a tool of power and influence.
In post-colonial Africa, this playbook was adopted, adapted, and often abused. Governments elected or not, crafted narratives to preserve legitimacy, silence dissent, and pacify the citizenry, often at the expense of truth and transparency.
One of the most emblematic figures in modern political spin-doctoring is Alastair Campbell. He was the formidable media strategist behind former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. Campbell’s influence on communications strategy was as undeniable as it was controversial. He understood the power of narrative and the tempo of media cycles. Under his stewardship, the Blair government mastered ‘message discipline’ and often stayed ahead of the news agenda. This brought clarity and cohesion to government messaging, an undeniable blessing in a noisy political environment. But it also carried burdens. The very machinery that made Blair’s team media-savvy also led to accusations of excessive control, suppression of dissent, and media manipulation. This was particularly so in the lead-up to the Iraq War.
Campbell’s legacy forces today’s advisers to reflect: is the purpose of communication to inform or to influence at all costs? His career is a cautionary tale of how even the most sophisticated media strategies can erode trust if not grounded in truth. Advisers must learn from his brilliance without repeating the missteps of overreach and opacity.
But today’s reality demands more than clever slogans and orchestrated praise-singing. It demands results. It demands integrity.
When Propaganda Overshadows Policy
The role of a policy adviser is, or should be, sacred. Yet many advisers have gradually morphed into apologists.They act more like public relations agents, or worse. They sometimes even act like court jesters in corridors of power. The cost is visible. We see poor decisions masked as visionary. Crises are blamed on imaginary saboteurs. The public needs no policies spun as successes long before they touch the lives they claim to serve.
If the economy is good, citizens will feel it. You will notneed to say it on radio or pay influencers to trend it. If inflation is down, if small businesses are growing, if youth are employed, the people will tell your story for you. Public commentaries must cite real examples of accomplishments, not projections, not theories, but actual lives improved.
If the judiciary is incorruptible and non-partisan, it will be visible in their rulings. Citizens will not need to read communiqués to perceive justice. Landmark rulings will speak louder than press statements. Demonstrate incorruptibility through the accomplishments of the courts, not through empty speeches at legal conferences.
If political leadership is good and purposeful, the citizens will be impacted by their actions. Not next year. Not after the next cycle. But now. Good leadership shows in accessible healthcare, quality education, roads that last, and electricity that stays on. It is not about projections, but real-time visible results.
So why, then, do many policy advisers resort to spin? Why the preference for optics over outcomes? Why is sycophancy mistaken for patriotism?
Allegiance Must Shift from Politicians to the People
Too many advisers align their loyalty to individual politicians, not to national good. The result is self-serving governance. Praising a failing administration only prolongs its failure. Masking incompetence only deepens the damage. Sycophancy is not patriotism. Allegiance should be to the national good. Not to individual politicians.
And when integrity is absent in advisory roles, policymaking becomes detached from reality. Advisers stop reading data and start reading the mood of their bosses. The goal becomes staying relevant, not telling the truth.
Reclaiming the Role: Where Do We Go from Here?
The world is watching Africa. With the continent’s population projected to double by 2050, the pressure to deliver smart, sustainable, and citizen-focused policies has never been higher. And that work begins, not with spin, but with truth.
Let us reintroduce integrity into policy advisory and public affairs analysis roles. Let us make room again for honesty, for the courage to say “No” when power demands applause. Let us counsel our leaders and run policy commentarieswith data, not drama. Let public analysts be critics when needed, and champions when deserved. But never cheerleaders by default. Because in the end, propaganda may win the morning, but it is integrity that wins the future.
The Author Collins Nweke is a Senior Consultant on International Trade and Economic Diplomacy. He served until December 2024 as Green Party Councillor at Ostend City Council Belgium. He has done extensive work across Africa and Europe. His focus includes matters of governance, diaspora, equitable trade, and financial inclusion. Collins writes from Brussels, Belgium.
Gatekeepers News is not liable for opinions expressed in this article, they’re strictly the writer’s
