The media is an actor in conflicts resolution that ‘speaks’ rather than ‘acts’. Its primary role in conflicts resolution is to discover and report on conflicts

Coverage of African conflicts appeared to end there, with very low levels of coverage of conflicts in the DRC, Angola, Sierra Leone and Ethiopia-Eritrea.

Do such interest groups response exist for Africa in Western countries, and if they do, how responsive are they concerning conflict on the continent?

In many ways, it can be said that the Corporations Response to the conflicts in Africa has been much significant. This is not necessarily, however, a positive statement.

The decision-making (or perhaps more appropriately: awareness-making) process of the public is quite varied, given the many types of actors within what we refer to as the public.

Once a conflict is ‘chosen’ as being important and requiring attention and resources, other actors jump on in a sort of ‘bandwagon’ effect, so that soon all of the actors of conflicts are talking about it.

In this article, we will see that, on the whole, conflict in Africa has marginalised by outside policymakers when compared to other conflicts in the world. Measures may be taken in response to conflict, but they almost invariably fall terribly short in terms of the scale (particularly in comparison with the needs) and the timeliness.

We have seen in the previous articles that, like policymakers outside the continent, the role of media in reporting conflicts in Africa hasn’t been considerably significant. This seems to apply to even to certain media corporations within Africa. This topic aims to investigate why this is the case. Media agenda-setting is determined, to a certain