Some years back when I was still a secondary school student, I overheard one of my cousins mentioning something interesting about information. She said, “Information is the most lucrative commodity.” At that time she was lecturing at Makerere University Business School. The statement stuck in my head and every now and then I think about it, trying to make sense out of it. The recently held presidential debate in Uganda got me thinking about that statement once again. You see this debate happened without the attendance of the incumbent, President Yoweri Museveni who argued that he was better off spending that time with his voters. I paid more attention to his handlers and supporters who spent a lot of time explaining how so many Ugandans have no access to TVs and so the debate did not matter. That claim sounds credible until you scratch the surface a lot more. Here is the question that we need to think of. If indeed information is the most lucrative then how can access to it certainly be impossible? Or to put it in another way, think of information like it was a drug. If drugs are very lucrative, are they very difficult to access? Why then do urban elites assume that the rural voters cannot access information just because it is on TV? I think it comes down to a combination of naivety or simply contempt of those they relegate to a class lower. The reality on the ground is quite interesting. For starters there are only four or five districts that are not connected to the electricity grid in Uganda out of more than 100. So we can safely assume that about 95 percent of the country has electricity. Secondly before you write of other people on the basis of access to TVs you have to scrutinise how those that have TVs use them. Content on TVs is largely consumed communally. In homes TV sets are often placed where everyone can watch from like in the living room. When something very important is on TV a neighbour without the luxury is often allowed to drop in and watch. Away from homes, many gathering spots have TVs as an entertainment option. From hotels to small bars, restaurants or hair salons you can be sure to find a TV set for the patrons to get access to that lucrative information being aired on the screen. This is how many people keep up with European football as well the Telenovelas (South American Soap Operas). Some of these places are actually in the business of increasing access to TV content. In many trading centres even in far flung districts you will find a video shack where locals part with a few shillings to watch their favourite English Premier League teams playing. Therefore the argument that many cannot afford DSTv can never hold and that is why sports betting booths can be found in almost every single trading centre you can think of not just in Uganda but East Africa as a whole. Sometimes this content like football is replayed also on radio stations complete with the commentary in a language listeners are more familiar to. Information now even flows horizontally across platforms. A debate aired on TV will result in clips of it doing the rounds on social media platforms like WhatsApp. Once the clip is on WhatsApp it will soon become common bar talk as one with the video will eagerly show it to a friend who had not seen it like the video of the house help who was battering a young girl. Smartphones and TVs are some of the gadgets anyone with a few bucks saved would want to own so access to them is always increasing by the day. The prices keep going down thanks to the influx of cheaper Chinese versions. All said, as long as an event is big enough, information about will be like the lucrative drug that will find its way to those who need it. Technology continues to make this flow of information much more fluid than ever before. And it is risky to assume that only urban elites have access to information in 2016. The language can be an issue but remember a country like Uganda has had universal education for more than 10 years and this info is often readily translated. In this era, there is a very thin line between the informed and the uninformed. I guess it is the interpretation of information is what we should be worrying about not access.
