Communication and Development
Communication has always been undermined when talking of development. When this has been considered, its role has always being limited to support already existing projects or co-ordinate the work of development workers. For many decades, co-operation for development has focused its attention on aspects such as health, agriculture forgetting many other aspects such as culture, freedom, needed to produce sustainable development.
The Structural Adjustment Plans and the Basic Needs strategies have for long produce projects that do not respect the multi-dimensional aspects of development. Up to date, communication for development is still an object of discord among many development workers. While some believe that communication can only accompany already established projects, a consistent number also believes a rapid flow of information is necessary to produce the liberty to choose and act, necessary to achieve sustainable development.
For some development practitioners, the mass media had to sell in the underdeveloped countries the ideas of progress and new technologies found in the developed world. Bringing the mass media to this people was, according to many, a means of developing this population. For the followers of this believe, if a person is exposed to a certain propaganda, the person can be controlled, manipulated and force to react in a certain way. Using the presume effect of the mass media on the population, they wished to divert the people from their “traditional” way of living towards a more “modern” way of living.
This vision that shaped the initial way of looking at communication for development believed developing countries had a certain track to follow to reach the develop countries, which are at the top of the civilisation ladder. This vision did not have any significant success. Inter- personal communication, popular culture, drums, oral tradition still remain the dominant media of transferring messages despite the pressure by the United Nations Education and Scientific Organisation (UNESCO), which in the ’60, in line with the will to transfer western model of media to the developing countries decided the minimum means of communication each nation should have. It was tabled that, for any 100 inhabitants, there should be at least 10 Newspapers, 5 radios, 2 television stations and 2 cinemas. This vision was bound to failure because its western centred vision had nothing to do with the basics needs of the poor. What will a poor farmer in a rural village in Ethiopia do with a television or a radio when he has nothing to eat or cloth?
Limited Effect Theory
To overcome the deterministic vision of the powers of the media came the limited effect theory, which said the effectiveness of any communication depends on the social context in which the speech is realized, and the various forces that dominate the scene at that moment. This new theory introduced a mediator, who in this case is an opinion leader. Thus communication is not a neutral aspect to force on people without understanding their needs and aspirations. The limited effect theory also tries to bring in a middle man that can mediate between the machine and the needs of the people.
The school of Frankfort demarcates itself more from the initial vision of communication saying communication is not neutral. Mass media manipulates people by producing standardized low quality products that reflect the ideas of nations, industries and organisation. Communication for development in this context can only serve as object of pressure on the developing countries because it does not reflect their views, but those of the producers. Followers of this view believe communication cannot help to bring progress or development because it harbors the vision of the dominating powers.
New Communication and Information Order (NCIO)
The Non Aligned countries not glad with the various tendencies development communication [1]has been taking, decided in the mid ’60 to define within the United Nations a program named, New International Economic Order (NIEO) in which UNESCO elaborated the New Communication and Information Order (NCIO). In this new order, the mass medium is no longer considered a means of attending modernity but communication becomes a tool for resistance, sensible to the socio-cultural, political and historic aspects of each nation.
However, all this various theories did not succeed to resolve the problem of communication and development. With new conceptions of development such as basic needs strategy, sustainable development, capacity building, which introduced new protagonist in the field of development co-operation such as NGO and “bottom up” organisations, coupled with the rise of concepts like empowerment, participation, governance, many started thinking of a new role communication could play in this new environment.
“Emancipatory communication”
Media for development at this stage became a pro-poor instrument to empower the women, minorities and the vulnerable components of the society. Communication became a means to create active citizens, free to choose the direction they wish to give to their lives. To borrow from Aimé Cesaire, we can say Development Communication was to become “the mouth of the mouthless miseres”.[i] For Freire, Development communication in this context assumes an emancipatory role. “Emancipatory communication” thus became a means to stimulate participation and also a way to express the problems of the vulnerable part of the society.
Development Support Communication (DSC)
Despite the great consideration given to the poor by Development Communication (DC), it still remained a “top-down” phenomenon where ideas still emanated from experts and benefactors with little or no input from end user. To overcome this weakness of the DC, a “bottom-up” communication with a horizontal sharing of ideas among development workers, end users and organisations; with the sole aim of eradicating poverty, through the satisfaction of the basic needs of the poor and the support of self determination through participation, was introduced. This new vision of communication for development was called Development Support Communication (DSC). After some initial resistance from international organisations such UNDP, United Nations International Children emergency Fund (UNICEF), Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), it became the dominant vision of development communication despite the continues reluctance of experts and benefactors to include the to-be-developed into the decision circle. Melkote and Steves(2001) posit that, while DC goes with the vision of development as a process of modernization, DSC has as its unique objective the creation of active citizens through empowerment. DSC can be regarded as a sought of decentralized communication that favors horizontal participation with no external pressure, where the language and form of communication are not conditioned by external powers.
The Structural Adjustment Plans and the Basic Needs strategies have for long produce projects that do not respect the multi-dimensional aspects of development. Up to date, communication for development is still an object of discord among many development workers. While some believe that communication can only accompany already established projects, a consistent number also believes a rapid flow of information is necessary to produce the liberty to choose and act, necessary to achieve sustainable development.
For some development practitioners, the mass media had to sell in the underdeveloped countries the ideas of progress and new technologies found in the developed world. Bringing the mass media to this people was, according to many, a means of developing this population. For the followers of this believe, if a person is exposed to a certain propaganda, the person can be controlled, manipulated and force to react in a certain way. Using the presume effect of the mass media on the population, they wished to divert the people from their “traditional” way of living towards a more “modern” way of living.
This vision that shaped the initial way of looking at communication for development believed developing countries had a certain track to follow to reach the develop countries, which are at the top of the civilisation ladder. This vision did not have any significant success. Inter- personal communication, popular culture, drums, oral tradition still remain the dominant media of transferring messages despite the pressure by the United Nations Education and Scientific Organisation (UNESCO), which in the ’60, in line with the will to transfer western model of media to the developing countries decided the minimum means of communication each nation should have. It was tabled that, for any 100 inhabitants, there should be at least 10 Newspapers, 5 radios, 2 television stations and 2 cinemas. This vision was bound to failure because its western centred vision had nothing to do with the basics needs of the poor. What will a poor farmer in a rural village in Ethiopia do with a television or a radio when he has nothing to eat or cloth?
Limited Effect Theory
To overcome the deterministic vision of the powers of the media came the limited effect theory, which said the effectiveness of any communication depends on the social context in which the speech is realized, and the various forces that dominate the scene at that moment. This new theory introduced a mediator, who in this case is an opinion leader. Thus communication is not a neutral aspect to force on people without understanding their needs and aspirations. The limited effect theory also tries to bring in a middle man that can mediate between the machine and the needs of the people.
The school of Frankfort demarcates itself more from the initial vision of communication saying communication is not neutral. Mass media manipulates people by producing standardized low quality products that reflect the ideas of nations, industries and organisation. Communication for development in this context can only serve as object of pressure on the developing countries because it does not reflect their views, but those of the producers. Followers of this view believe communication cannot help to bring progress or development because it harbors the vision of the dominating powers.
New Communication and Information Order (NCIO)
The Non Aligned countries not glad with the various tendencies development communication [1]has been taking, decided in the mid ’60 to define within the United Nations a program named, New International Economic Order (NIEO) in which UNESCO elaborated the New Communication and Information Order (NCIO). In this new order, the mass medium is no longer considered a means of attending modernity but communication becomes a tool for resistance, sensible to the socio-cultural, political and historic aspects of each nation.
However, all this various theories did not succeed to resolve the problem of communication and development. With new conceptions of development such as basic needs strategy, sustainable development, capacity building, which introduced new protagonist in the field of development co-operation such as NGO and “bottom up” organisations, coupled with the rise of concepts like empowerment, participation, governance, many started thinking of a new role communication could play in this new environment.
“Emancipatory communication”
Media for development at this stage became a pro-poor instrument to empower the women, minorities and the vulnerable components of the society. Communication became a means to create active citizens, free to choose the direction they wish to give to their lives. To borrow from Aimé Cesaire, we can say Development Communication was to become “the mouth of the mouthless miseres”.[i] For Freire, Development communication in this context assumes an emancipatory role. “Emancipatory communication” thus became a means to stimulate participation and also a way to express the problems of the vulnerable part of the society.
Development Support Communication (DSC)
Despite the great consideration given to the poor by Development Communication (DC), it still remained a “top-down” phenomenon where ideas still emanated from experts and benefactors with little or no input from end user. To overcome this weakness of the DC, a “bottom-up” communication with a horizontal sharing of ideas among development workers, end users and organisations; with the sole aim of eradicating poverty, through the satisfaction of the basic needs of the poor and the support of self determination through participation, was introduced. This new vision of communication for development was called Development Support Communication (DSC). After some initial resistance from international organisations such UNDP, United Nations International Children emergency Fund (UNICEF), Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), it became the dominant vision of development communication despite the continues reluctance of experts and benefactors to include the to-be-developed into the decision circle. Melkote and Steves(2001) posit that, while DC goes with the vision of development as a process of modernization, DSC has as its unique objective the creation of active citizens through empowerment. DSC can be regarded as a sought of decentralized communication that favors horizontal participation with no external pressure, where the language and form of communication are not conditioned by external powers.