I read with delight—and a sense of pride—an article by “the Legend”, Kwame Adinkrah, PhD, titled “The Ghanaian Media Economy and Its Sustainability.”                            

Dr Adinkrah’s standing, experience, and impact as a broadcaster and morning show host in Ghana are unrivalled; only a few can match his consistency and influence over the years.

My appreciation is also personal. I recall with nostalgia my final-year days at Unity Hall, KNUST, when “Apotiti Mati” gave me the unique opportunity to gain broadcasting experience at Focus FM (94.3 MHz). In the year 2000, I hosted an early-morning prayer and devotional programme—an experience that left an indelible mark on my understanding of radio as both a craft and a calling.

Dr Adinkrah makes several compelling points that deserve commendation and acknowledgement without debate. He observes that many media houses in Ghana are bleeding financially—a reality echoed by investors across the sector. He identifies volatile audience loyalty, dwindling advertising revenues, and rising operational costs as key challenges. He also bemoans the entrenched culture in which on-air personalities are routinely “poached” from one station to another under agreed fees and fixed terms of service.

According to him, this has become a perpetual cycle: the same presenter is soon compelled to seek yet another poaching fee from a new investor to meet obligations and maintain income levels. This situation, the Legend argues, stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of the media economy, leading successive generations of investors to assume—erroneously—that radio ownership is intrinsically profitable.

As one who has benefited from this very “poaching culture,” Dr Adinkrah, speaking with the benefit of experience and hindsight, could hardly have expressed this reality better.

He rightly advocates a redefinition of media ownership beyond prestige and political leverage. The sustainability of Ghana’s media economy, he argues, will not be secured by the mere proliferation of stations, the recycling of talent, or the illusion of influence. Rather, it requires sound economic foundations, ethical ownership, innovation, and long-term vision.

Dr Adinkrah further calls on policymakers to update regulatory frameworks to reflect contemporary realities, even while conceding that sustainability cannot be legislated into existence. Indeed, it remains unclear how regulators can intervene meaningfully within the current constitutional, legislative, and judicial imperatives that guarantee media freedom and remove barriers to broadcasting authorisation.

Until then, I dare say that this phase of Ghana’s media evolution shall pass. Let the wheat and the tares grow together. Market forces, technological change, and economic realities will ultimately be the levellers—a self-cleansing mechanism that will demystify the current craze for radio frequency authorisations.

As Denis McQuail argues in Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction (Sage, 1983), mass media is not static; it evolves. He identifies six normative theories—authoritarian theory, free press theory, social responsibility theory, Soviet media theory, development media theory, and democratic participant theory—to explain how media systems develop, what is expected of them, and how they function in practice.

For present purposes, it is useful to focus on the first two theories. The era of Authoritarian Theory—characterised by state control, media monopoly, and a culture of silence—ended with the advent of the Fourth Republican Constitution. The daring experiment of Dr Charles Wereko-Brobby’s Radio Eye breached the dam, unleashing independent media and ushering Ghana into the era of Free Press Theory.

By and large, Ghana remains stuck at this normative stage—one that struggles with questions of whose freedom is being exercised, monopolistic tendencies, media hegemony, and the close identification of freedom with profit and private ownership. The uncritical rush for broadcasting authorisations, without rigorous analysis of their business case, explains much of the economic distress highlighted earlier.

Social Responsibility Theory upholds media freedom tempered by responsibility—freedom reconciled with obligation to society. Ghana’s media landscape is yet to make a decisive transition to this phase. Advocacy for social responsibility must therefore continue, with renewed emphasis on neutrality, balance, and accountability to society, while ensuring that commercial success is not decoupled from cultural relevance and public influence.

Admittedly, a firmer approach to frequency allocation could help control the sheer number of media outlets. However, this alone will not resolve the economic and operational challenges confronting many media houses. A deeper appreciation of the media’s place in society—not merely as an economic or political tool, but as a platform to inform, educate, and entertain—is essential to redefining sustainable business models.

Ultimately, it is market forces, audience capital, and technological evolution that will determine which media enterprises survive. Stricter regulation, by itself, cannot be the answer.