Towards A Reassessment of Africa’s Film Streaming Strategies 

Film distribution in Africa has come under scrutiny in recent times. The purported downscaling of investments from Prime Video and Netflix opens the window for potential investors and media stakeholders to chart new directions in the African market. Showmax still has a grip on the continent, at least as a home-based frontliner, but a cloud of uncertainty lingers over its prospects amid talks of a merger between its majority shareholder MultiChoice and France’s ambitious media outfit Studio Canal. Circuits TV, which launched around December last year, is teething and yet to cut it. It’s early to judge, but we are not sure what impact this new platform can make in a market overwhelmed by harsh economic realities. Yet the streaming wars will not end any time soon.

In Nigeria, filmmakers are turning to YouTube to boycott the hassles of distribution. However, veteran Nollywood filmmaker Niyi Akinmolayan believes that this is not a lasting solution. “Filmmakers pivoting to YouTube is just desperation,” he says in an exclusive with Culture Custodian. “People shouldn’t watch films, the work that we do, for free because it encourages mediocrity and piracy. I know how much I spent on a film like Lisabi and I want people to pay to watch it. And the fact that people like free things doesn’t mean they won’t pay for quality stuff when the time comes.”

On 7th April, 2025, Africa-based telecommunications brand, MTN Group, announced a new partnership with Synamedia, a UK-headquartered video technology company, with a view towards creating a streaming platform that will offer linear TV and video-on-demand content using “diverse monetisation models.” This, according to the official statement, will result in “digital content accessibility”  and appeal to “the evolving preferences of African audiences.” This development, which positions MTN × Synamedia on a course to compete with already existing streaming giants, also elicits doubts and concerns around brand uniqueness in an already cumbersome African market. What exactly are these diverse monetisation models that the partnership is keen on, and how do they differ from already existing ones? How do they intend to make African digital content more accessible than it has ever been? By what metrics do we define and measure the evolving preferences of African audiences especially knowing that the continent is littered with people of diverse cultural and social realities?

MTN’s move feels like power play at its finest, especially as it comes on the heels of a recent reordering of priorities. In Nigeria, around January, the network provider implemented a 50% tariff hike, with the approval of the Nigerian Communications Commission. This has not gone down well with Nigerian users, many of whom have lamented the subtle exploitative increase in data and call charges. Introducing a streaming agenda at this sensitive time will easily be interpreted as another purely capitalist move rather than a gesture of genuine concern for the precarious state of film distribution in Africa. As such, if MTN is serious about making a difference, they must come out clean and disclose a complete breakdown of how they intend to outwit the likes Netflix, Prime Video and Showmax.

An ideal and sustainable streaming platform for Africa requires questioning and finding gaps in existing Western models. To achieve this, the experts involved must first conduct a proper study of the film market in the continent against the backdrop of the dire economic circumstances of her diverse people. As we know, African cinema is a fledgling industry whose marketing strategies are yet to yield huge commercial successes as Hollywood blockbusters on the global stage. This reality cannot be ignored in any efforts towards determining pricing and operational models for a sustainable streaming platform. An ideal platform will offer a palette of options, from mobile and data-friendly packages to offline viewing and strategic partnerships towards subsidising costs. It is also important for the platform to invest in more Original African content, prioritizing the use and promotion of indigenous African languages such as Hausa, Swahili, Xhosa, Amharic, Igbo, Zulu, Oromo, Yoruba and Shona. By extension, the platform must be equitable in posture, giving fair treatment to the different regions of the continent and making sure to cater genuinely to the heterogeneous tastes of her people.

Community building should not be overlooked by any serious investor as well. The gospel of a sustainable streamer cannot be preached without equally catering obsessively to African screen through educational programmes, strategic intra-continental initiatives, profound journalism and purposeful alliances with film and television industries across other continents of the world.

Akinmolayan weighs in on the peculiar case of Nollywood in its search for optimal streaming opportunities, hinting at the need for a sense of community amongst filmmakers: “The Nigerian approach is to wait for the next Netflix or so. But I think one way to make distribution work in Nigeria is to build a local platform, and we the filmmakers have to commit to making it work. We need to sit down together on a table and decide on a streaming platform to release major films on for a period of time. All we need is for at least five top filmmakers in the industry to come together and make that decision. This will drive progress, and everyone else will see the need to sign up on the platform. And we must also figure out how to ensure that the platform is secure and our films are not pirated.”

Most importantly, building anything worthwhile in African cinema requires mammoth financial investment, a great deal of perseverance and an undying commitment towards constantly reassessing the local and diaspora market and adjusting to evolving trends. Choosing between a unified approach or multiple streaming outlets does not matter. What matters is combining the right strategies for profound, optimal results.