merely on external propaganda, but on the creation of a listening community that, as will
be shown, lay at the very heart of the nation-building process (Kind-Kovács, 2019).
Rádio Libertação, which broadcast in Portuguese, Creole, and several Guinean
languages—Balanta, Biafada, Mancanha, Manjaco, Fula, and Mandinga—was “a radical
experiment in collective cultural production” and “a praxis that is itself a source of
anticolonial ideas about culture” (Reza, 2022, p. 859). The reach of the station went far
beyond the borders of Guinean territory, extending to “Cabo Verde, Senegal, and even
to some European countries, where our emigrants managed to capture the broadcasts”
(Pereira, 2003, p. 334). The radio was part of the broader effort to break what Cabral’s
close comrade Mário Pinto de Andrade called the “obscurantism” of Salazarist
propaganda, which isolated the Portuguese colonies on the world stage and turned them
into “zones of silence” (Fele, 1957, p. 71).
Rádio Libertação did not replace Cabral’s presence, but amplified it, granting him a
ubiquity that his body could not have. According to Amélia S. Araújo, Cabral was the
most assiduous contributor to the station, writing most of the editorials and texts that
unmasked colonial propaganda (Pereira, 2003, p. 335). Cabral himself compared the
broadcasts of Rádio Libertação to the “mouth cannon” (canhão de boca) of the national
liberation struggle, a warlike metaphor that highlights the understanding of the
mediatized word as a front of combat as decisive as military action (Pereira, 2003, p.
333). In the 1969 seminar, when reflecting on the means of propaganda and information
at the service of the struggle, Cabral emphasized the strategic importance of Rádio
Libertação:
For this very reason, one of the greatest victories of our party is our Rádio
Libertação, our newspaper, our press, our information, both inside and
outside our land. We all know the strength, the value of our party’s Station,
which makes propaganda for our people and which we must be able to
improve every day, because this is an essential element, an essential means
of our propaganda for propagating our resistance (Cabral, 1979, 96).
This approach by the PAIGC stands in stark contrast to the broadcasting policy of the
Portuguese colonial regime itself. While Salazar’s Estado Novo (New State) demonstrated
a chronic disinterest in investing in shortwave broadcasts to its empire, neglecting to
create a unified and effective voice for the colonies (Ribeiro, 2014), Cabral recognised in
radio a central instrument of struggle. Rádio Libertação, therefore, not only filled an
informational void but also exposed the fragility of the colonial propaganda machine,
which was never able to compete with the agility and authenticity of the PAIGC’s “voice”.
Zumthor observes that auditory media and the written word share three fundamental
characteristics: They abolish the physical presence of the speaker; they free themselves
from chronological time by making the voice reiterable and indefinitely repeatable; and
they tend to erase the spatial references of the living voice, creating an artificially
composed space (Zumthor, 1990, p. 14). Still, he acknowledges that “what is lost with
the media, and thus necessarily remains so, is corporeality, the weight, the warmth, the
real volume of the body, of which the voice is only an expansion” (p. 16). He sees auditory