Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This analysis investigates media coverage of China in Nigeria, revealing tensions between portrayal and reality.
Although the 2018 FOCAC summit witnessed the proposition of several mutually beneficial action plans between China and Africa, this renewed Sino-African cooperation is fraught with escalating tensions and concerns about China’s growing dominance. This calls for more recent empirical understanding of the salience conferred on China’s diplomacy and Sino-African issues by domestic media in Africa. First, this paper analyses the nature of China’s expanding diplomatic frontiers in the continent’s largest economy, Nigeria. Anchored on Framing theory, this study, then, proceeds to investigate the coverage of China and Sino-African engagements in the highly polarized Nigerian media-sphere. Evidence from a thematic analysis of four purposively selected Nigerian newspapers from September 2018 to September 2020, reveals that elite newspapers ( Guardian and THISDAY ) held more critical stance of China’s diplomatic activities on the continent than newspapers that cater for the general public ( Leadership and Punch ). It was further observed that media portrayal of China diverged from the framing of Sino-African ties as newspapers mostly employ positive frames such Exemplary development , Superior superpower , and Benefactor to describe China as a nation. However, when reporting issues related to China’s relationship with Africa, the recurrent frames are often negative such as Machiavellianism , Economic colonialism , and Hostility/Racism . On a pragmatic level, these findings underscore the inadequacies of China soft power strategies in Africa as its projected stance of mutualism and partnership is counteracted by its perceived practices of exploitation and economic sabotage. Theoretical implications are discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Salaudeen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: