Ugandan poverty gets 'reality TV' makeover
Written by: Megan Rowling

World Vision Uganda director Rudo Kwaramba prepares for filming in her role as mentor to the British entrepreneurs in Channel 4 reality-TV series Millionaire's Mission.
PHOTO/World Vision
PHOTO/World Vision
Development in Africa doesn't sound like the most suitable subject for a reality TV show - but perhaps the attraction of D-list celebrities being force fed insects in far-flung jungles is finally starting to wear thin. Television bosses might be hoping they can rejuvenate a tired format by focusing on something a little more "worthy". Whatever the motivation, getting relief and development issues onto mainstream TV is so tough these days, you can hardly blame aid agency World Vision for co-operating with producers who wanted to make a show challenging entrepreneurs to come up with a fresh approach to reducing poverty. In Millionaires' Mission, a four-part television series being aired on Britain's Channel 4, eight successful British business people - worth more than £600 million between them - grapple with the challenge of improving living standards in Rukiga, a remote farming community in southwestern Uganda. With only three weeks and a total budget of £120,000, it's quite a task. Luckily, World Vision's national director for Uganda, Rudo Kwaramba, is on hand to give the budding Bonos a crash course in aid "dos and don'ts", and (one hopes) to stop them doing anything really crazy. Mind you, that doesn't prevent construction tycoon Steve Morgan from furtively handing out dollars to one particularly needy woman, nor rashly promising to deliver the majority of the community's wish list, including a decent water supply and renovations to the school, health centre and roads, as well as repairs to the village ambulance. But let's face it, without the blunders, what would viewers learn? In an interview with AlertNet, Kwaramba explains that the show's producers kept her somewhat distant from the entrepreneurs during filming, with the aim, she suspects, of letting them make some mistakes. Even as an experienced professional, Kwaramba says being involved in the programme led her to realise a few home truths about aid. "It would be easy to condemn the guy who handed money to the woman with the hungry child, but NGOs (non-governmental organisations) do it too - just in a more ordered way. It's called relief," she explains. In the show, she provides a nifty explanation of the difference between short-term aid and longer-term development. Getting such nuggets of wisdom on prime-time TV is no mean feat. I admit I watched the first episode with some trepidation. It didn't take long for someone to come out with a corker. "I just wonder to how much of an extent people choose to live like this rather than are forced to live like this," wonders Dominic McVey, a 22-year-old who's made a small fortune from micro-scooters, as he gazes out of the window at a fairly typical Ugandan street scene. Other cringe-worthy moments include the sight of pub-chain owner Tony Callaghan weeping with emotion at a cheery welcome extended by the local community. As his colleague Deirdre Bounds - owner of a travel volunteer company - points out, the performance is a smart business move. Not something to cry about, you'd have thought. The entrepreneurs again show themselves up by getting angry when most of the local chiefs don't turn up to a meeting they've called - for which Kwaramba gives them an equally indignant ticking off. "I responded off the cuff," she tells me during our phone interview. "The fact that you turn up with money doesn't mean village life stops." WHOSE AGENDA? Kwaramba says that participating in the programme has made her question how aid agencies often parachute into communities with their own agendas, expecting local people to jump to their tune. "We don't put enough effort into moving at the pace of the community, but we also put in too much money," she argues. "We need more of the community's resolve and a lot less money to make things more sustainable. We're weighing down communities with outside resources." Sadly, in the first episode of Millionaire's Mission, Rukiga's residents are treated as little more than a supporting cast for the foreign stars of the show. We learn next to nothing about the community and its people, who are presented as a generic bunch of poor Africans. And it's pretty clear that, despite three days of "consultation", they won't get much of a say in what the entrepreneurs end up doing to "help them". The Brits row over whether they should use their money to install a new system to cut the time it takes villagers to fetch water (Morgan is pretty much a lone champion of this idea), or set up a hotel for foreign volunteers who'd also teach English in the local school. The latter didn't feature on the community's list of priorities, but is still the group's project of choice. As the entrepreneurs point out, they're not aid workers and were brought in to come up with something innovative. But given that, what was the point in asking local people what they wanted, thereby raising false expectations? "Whenever development interrupts people's lives, we've failed," observes Karamba in our interview. "It should be about what they'd have done - but helping them to do it faster and working together." Aid critics might argue that volunteer tourism is more likely to benefit Rukiga than traditional health or education projects. By episode four, hopefully we'll be able to judge for ourselves. But, entertainment value aside, Millionaires' Mission does nothing to buck the development status quo of outsiders deciding what's best for impoverished Africans. Millionaires' Mission is being screened on Britain's Channel 4 on Wednesday evenings at 9pm local time (ending on October 10). The series also has a website. World Vision UK offers more background information, as well as a video interview with entrepreneur Deirdre Bounds. Rudo Kwaramba says there's no definite plan to show the series in Uganda, but hopes this will change.
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
We welcome argument but AlertNet will not publish comments that are racist, abusive or libellous.
5 responses to “Ugandan poverty gets 'reality TV' makeover”
Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
Unlike some other content on this website, the written content in this article may be republished or redistributed by any means free of charge. Any use of photographs and graphics on this website is expressly prohibited. You must check whether written content contained in other articles on this website may be republished or redistributed without the express permission of Reuters or the relevant third party provider.
27 Sep 2007 11:34:27 GMT
If agencies did not realize that they should not just "parachute in with aid" without getting together with local communities and chiefs etc., what the heck are they doing. Anyone with knows that one cannot put ones own agenda's without consultation for goodness sake. This is not brain surgery just plain commonsense.
The first part of any project one should ensure that there is cooperation and not just money poured in otherwise the plan or whatever will not be sustainable without community help especially in africa with the various demands made up aid.27 Sep 2007 11:34:30 GMT
I have not seen this as I live in NZ, however I suspect that the tears may have been real, when someone sees with their heart for the first time it is transformative
28 Sep 2007 07:45:38 GMT
The little facts and exposure I have with NGO based or any form of help that comes over long periods of time to perceived poor in Africa, have confirmed to me beyond reasonable doubt that too much aid makes communities lazy, over dependent and therefore unproductive even in those areas they would have done well without aid. In Africa people are not poor but simply do not have the knowledge to use the rich resources around them for their own good. This is epecially the case around the Great Lakes Region where fertile soil, assured rain throughout the year and vast land that could be harnessed for agriculture, minerals and now oil abounds. If aid would help such people then let it be focused on imparting knowledge on how to use these resources. Not more high nutrition biscuits, food rations, free shelter. free sanitaion facilities free malaria medication etc. Money spent to package this form of aid could be spent to educate the peop! le and, most important, ensure that the knowledge they receive helps them to improve their lifestyle even without material aid. This must go beyond actual skills for agricuture or other economic activities. The education must address the mindset of individuals. Let there be some form of education that will drive the mindset of the people from believeing they are poor but rather that they have the potential to be self sustainable. This self sustainability must not be misinteprented to meen financial riches as it is today in most of the people in Africa. Let their minds start seing the riches in their banana plantaions, their sisal, their jackfruit, their cattle, their natural resources like the rocks, the fish, etc. The riches in their physical ability to do things, eg use tractors to cultivate land etc. Riches in uniting to protect their environment and natural resources without necessarily taking arms to fight each other.
30 Sep 2007 10:57:17 GMT
I am truely suprised at Ms Kwaramba' 'revelation' on 'how aid agencies often parachute into communities with their own agendas, expecting local people to jump to their tune.' As an aid worker in Africa I would say that is one of our top frustrations, much of it determined not by the agencies but by donors. On the Programme itself, id say that the taste is dubious. I would have hoped that World Vison and Channel 4 would have had a bit more sensitivity. I guess its back to 80's image of the helpless African who needs to be 'saved' by the rich, rolling-in-it super-hero. DISGUSTING!
04 Oct 2007 07:17:37 GMT
I am currently a senior support worker, working with children and adults with learning disabilities for my local authority. If required, I would be happy to give up work for 6 months and work free to help out with education and teaching. It appears that for this village, learning the english language is important for the future of this community to enable them to move forward. I would be honoured to help in any way possible.