Famine looms, millions are displaced, and atrocities unfold daily. Yet, despite the staggering scale of suffering, the conflict has been met with global indifference. Western headlines remain fixated on Ukraine, Gaza, or political scandals, while Sudan’s agony plays out in near-total media silence.
This neglect is not accidental. It reflects a long-standing pattern in which crises in Africa—particularly in poorer, less strategically vital nations—are systematically underreported and underfunded. The reasons for this are both structural and deeply rooted in bias.
Geopolitical Irrelevance
Media coverage often follows power, not suffering. Western news outlets prioritize stories that resonate with their audiences or align with their governments’ interests. Sudan, despite its size and regional importance, holds little strategic value for most Western nations. Unlike Ukraine, where Western military and economic stakes are high, or Gaza, which sits at the center of a globally contentious issue, Sudan’s war lacks a clear geopolitical “hook” to sustain attention. Without a direct link to Western security, economics, or politics, the crisis slips into obscurity.
The Fatigue of African Tragedies
Decades of reductive storytelling about Africa have conditioned the world to view its conflicts as inevitable rather than urgent. When wars erupt in Europe or the Middle East, they are framed as shocking disruptions. But when violence consumes Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, or the Sahel, it is often dismissed as just another “African crisis”—complex, intractable, and too distant to matter. This narrative fatigue leads to shallow, sporadic coverage, reducing human suffering to background noise.
The Racism of Low Expectations
There is an unspoken hierarchy of empathy in global media. The deaths of white or light-skinned victims often provoke outrage; the deaths of Black and brown civilians are met with resignation. Studies have shown that Western media dedicates significantly less airtime to disasters in non-white nations, and when they do, the framing tends to be more detached, less emotional, and less likely to spur action. The dehumanization of African lives plays out in editorial rooms, where stories are deemed “unmarketable” because audiences supposedly won’t connect with them.
What Can Be Done
Breaking this cycle requires conscious effort. Media organizations must challenge their own biases, dedicating resources to sustained, nuanced coverage of underreported crises. Policymakers must stop treating African conflicts as inevitable and start applying the same diplomatic pressure seen in other regions. And audiences must demand better—rejecting the idea that some lives are inherently less newsworthy than others.
Until then, Sudan’s suffering will continue in the shadows, a stark reminder of who the world chooses to see, and who it chooses to ignore.