The decision by Ethiopian state media outlets such as Fana Broadcasting and the Ethiopian Broadcasting Corporation (EBC) to avoid reporting on the overthrow of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, while covering other international stories like the TikTok Ban Bill, reveals much about the priorities and strategies of state-controlled media. This selective reporting, especially of such a significant international event, can be better understood by examining the domestic and political context in Ethiopia.

Ethiopia is currently facing significant unrest, particularly in the Amhara and Oromia regions, where ongoing conflicts have strained the government’s resources and public image. Reporting on Assad’s overthrow—a story symbolizing the collapse of an authoritarian regime—could inadvertently draw parallels to Ethiopia’s own challenges with governance and opposition movements. This parallel might embolden critics or opposition forces and risk amplifying public dissatisfaction at a time when the government seeks to control narratives around internal stability.

Ethiopian state media tends to prioritize stories that align with the government’s objectives or that project a sense of stability and order. By focusing on less politically charged international stories, such as the TikTok Ban Bill, Fana Broadcasting and EBC can present themselves as engaged with global affairs while avoiding topics that could indirectly undermine the government’s domestic standing.

The Ethiopian government has historically used media censorship to maintain control over public discourse. In this context, the omission of Assad’s fall can be seen as a continuation of this strategy. Highlighting the overthrow of a long-standing leader might inadvertently raise questions about Ethiopia’s own political trajectory, governance challenges, and the sustainability of the federal system amidst regional tensions.

The selective reporting by state media risks further eroding public trust, especially among Ethiopians who access alternative sources of information. News of Assad’s overthrow is widely available on global platforms, and its absence from Ethiopian state media creates a noticeable gap that viewers are likely to question. This could reinforce perceptions that Fana Broadcasting and EBC are not reliable sources of comprehensive news, driving audiences to independent or foreign outlets.

The Ethiopian government may also be using the ongoing conflicts in Amhara and Oromia as a justification for its silence. In times of war or instability, governments often prioritize domestic news or frame international events in ways that reinforce their narratives of unity and resilience. Reporting on Assad’s overthrow could divert attention from government efforts to manage internal unrest or contradict its messaging on the importance of stability and centralized authority.

The Ethiopian state media’s decision to avoid reporting on Bashar al-Assad’s overthrow highlights how domestic political realities and ongoing conflicts influence narrative control. By muting this story, Fana Broadcasting and EBC aim to avoid drawing parallels between Syria’s regime change and Ethiopia’s own governance challenges, particularly during a time of internal instability.

While this strategy may serve short-term goals of narrative management, it risks further alienating a skeptical and increasingly informed audience. As Ethiopia navigates its internal and external challenges, the role of state media in balancing transparency with strategic communication will continue to shape public perception and trust in government institutions.