The Media Missionaries

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

WHERE ARE WE AFTER A DECADE OF DEVELOPMENT?

When the Communist barricades collapsed in 1989, hundreds of Americans rushed in to spread the gospel of democracy. Among them were some of America's most prominent and altruistic journalists, hoping to midwife a newly free and independent press.

Now over a decade has passed and more than $600 million has been donated by American government and private supporters like the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation to develop media capacity around the world. Millions have gone into legal training and other aspects of democracy-building, the requisite "enabling environment" for public service media. Thousands of journalists have been trained and empowered; television and radio networks have been established; newspapers have been recreated and in some countries, corrupt governments have fallen, thanks to reporting that was unimaginable before 1989.

But the picture is far from perfect. In all too many places, including the core post-Communist societies where most of the money was spent, independent media are struggling now against a second wave of repression and censorship. It is time to assess what worked and what didn't, what lessons have been learned, and where we go from here.

By far the biggest American players in the field of media development have been USAID and George Soros' Open Society Institute. They and hundreds of other organizations have worked to develop media in order to advance democracy, starting in Latin America in the 1980s, and then moving to the Communist bloc in the 1990s. Now they are looking toward Afghanistan, the Middle East and parts of Asia. Some are active in Africa. The need for successful media development continues unabated, in virtually every corner of the globe. Yet at the same time, financial woes have forced the Freedom Forum to cancel its foreign programs, and some other foundations are restricting grant expansion plans in order to keep their current programs in place.

The survival of independent journalism in countries where politicians or oligarchs are abusing media for their own self-interest depends on finding alternative sources of power. This can come from a combination of economic independence, international funding and pressure, and local public support. Civil disobedience-such as recent pro-media street demonstrations and boycotts in Russia, Georgia, the Czech Republic and Kazakhstan-needs to be followed up by more sustained local and regional legal clout, backed by international support. Media need to adopt a public service mission to earn the public's loyalty. In most of the world, this remains a challenge. In addition, neither the lawyers nor the journalists in these emerging democracies know much about their own local or international media laws, nor are the courts likely to interpret them in favor of the press.1

In some regions, including much of the former U.S.S.R, the millions of dollars spent have not yet produced a viable independent media sector. Politicians or oligarchs have taken over much of what was developed, diverting the media's mission from public to private ends. Yet the time frame still is short, and thousands of trained local journalists are at work despite difficult, even dangerous, conditions. Regional populations are starting to learn a great deal more from the media about what is really going on, in their backyards and the wider world. The effort clearly is worth it, particularly in contrast to information vacuums that spawn terrorist cultures. If it's two steps forward, one step back, media development still is a valuable endeavor, with benefits for Americans as well as the international communities they are trying to help.

The time has come for a second generation of media development, with a commitment to dig in for the long haul. Here is how the field looks in the spring of 2002:

• There is no one-size fits all approach to media development. It has to be designed according to the region, to each country within a region, and sometimes to each region in a country.
• The 9/11 terrorist attacks laid bare the serious stakes for improving media professionalism in such countries as Egypt, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The situation in the Middle East and Afghanistan was still too volatile, at press time, for anything but crisis intervention and stop-gap measures.
• Virtually all indigenous Palestinian media operations were destroyed in recent weeks. The State Department recently committed millions to media development in the region, asking for three-month, $1 million projects from contractors in the Middle East, Gulf States, and Central Asia. "Access to accurate information is probably the most desperately needed commodity in the Middle East right now," said ICFJ's Whayne Dillehay.
• U.S. government and private media development money was pouring into Afghanistan at press time, but probably it was too soon to be effective. There still is no coordination, no Internet access, poor security, and no place for trainers to stay, according to Dillehay. Leadership is needed for the various media developers to establish a coherent approach here.
• Africa urgently needs every kind of media help, and the spread of HIV/AIDS adds special importance to this region. New funding could make a difference here with a regional project or even relatively modest, targeted programs.
• Latin America warrants further support to build on progress in countries like Mexico and to address crises like Colombia. Ngos can make a big difference in the region because Latin America is not overwhelmed by USAID, Soros or other media developers.
• The former Communist bloc, including the Balkans, remains firmly in the hands of the big U.S. government contractees (IREX and Internews) and Soros organizations. It is too soon for developers to withdraw from this region since even in Hungary and the Czech Republic, which are seemingly "democratic" countries, politicians are effectively pressuring or blocking independent media, taking advantage of their vulnerability in a weak advertising market.
• There are too many organizations working in too few places. They tend to cluster in a few glamorous spots: Johannesburg, South Africa; Phnom Penh, Cambodia; the Balkans, and Moscow. More strategic, coordinated work is urgently needed outside those capitals, particularly in Africa.
• China has been simply too big and too touchy, but the Internet and American commercial investors provide new openings there.
• Public service media in emerging democracies need help with (1) economic sustainability, (2) legal support and education, (3) open media policy advocacy, and (4) local journalism organizations that offer professional training, media criticism and a unified front against coercion.
• Community radio remains one of the most effective opportunities across Africa, Afghanistan and other regions that lack media/ telephony infrastructure.
• Private funders are much better positioned than the U.S. government to assist with independent media policy legal battles. More consistent leadership is needed to get past simply monitoring and reacting to abuses. A more proactive, coordinated role is needed for groups like IFEX, CPJ, WAN, Article 19 and others to promote open media policies, FOIA laws, and Internet freedom.
• Cross-digital platform training is a great way to get buy-in from media owners and managers, and can help legitimize mid-career education in Latin America and Asia.
• Public service values and ethics training are needed everywhere, but must be combined with practical, technical training to be palatable.

This next decade of development should live by the lessons learned from the past decade, summarized in the "Fifteen Commandments of Media Development":

THE 15 COMMANDMENTS OF MEDIA DEVELOPMENT

1. Build from the bottom up, rather than the top down. It doesn't work simply to arrive and try to establish something based on Western models. If all politics is local, so is all good media development.

You need buy-in at the grassroots level, with locals who are dedicated to the project and involved in the strategic planning and project development. Be careful of setting up commercial ventures with direct funding that will drive up salaries throughout the media sector, making it more difficult for indigenous local media to compete.

Instead of launching a new office in Southeast Asia, the World Press Freedom Committee wisely decided to offer the funds to SEAPA to extend its work. When SEAPA challenges anti-media policies, politicians can't charge that it is "Western imperialism" at work.

Westerners have to understand the problems in the local setting, how to resolve them, and why local assistance providers haven't solved them already.

2. Economic sustainability must be addressed sooner or later. This is perhaps the biggest challenge of all.

Suggestion: It is long overdue to examine more systematically what business and economic models can be devised for supporting fair, comprehensive news in emerging and even mature democracies. The traditional advertising model for print and broadcast should not be the only one available. In America it is challenged by Internet and TIVO recorders; in Latin America, it is the vehicle for narrow political control, and in some post-Communist societies, it is not workable at all.

"In Kyrgyzstan, our office is struggling because it's going to be a long time before there's any market for supporting a TV station. Teaching people to sell advertising and rely on that in places where it's physically not possible, doesn't make sense."

Manana Aslamazian, Internews

In Georgia, owner Erosi Kitsmarishvili of Rustavi 2 television supports his news operations with ancillary cell phone and Internet businesses. Now he is looking for American investors to help him start a newspaper. The Media Development Loan Fund (MDLF) and the GRAMEEN BANK system2 offer interesting approaches that might be adapted to a variety of unorthodox local ventures.

Northwestern University's MMC and IAPA train media managers and owners, but there isn't much visible work at the management level on public service journalism, probably because it is harder to support than entertainment journalism and it raises political hackles (n.b. Mexico's new independent papers). Perhaps scholarly studies, or a blue-ribbon journalists' commission, could find a way to inject public service into the media business. New Directions for News is exploring these issues in the U.S., but it is not clear who has realistic, adaptable business models for foreign public service journalism other than Bill Siemering, who has found NPR worth replicating in developing countries.

3. Time, patience and collaboration are essential. Independent media cannot be expected to spring to life in otherwise anti-democratic societies. This requires a sustained commitment, and collaboration with other democracy developers. Open media's "enabling environment" includes legal and marketplace reform.

Suggestion: More pro-active, collaborative work on policy, ethics and media law is needed locally, regionally and globally. Consider training more journalists and lawyers about local and international media laws.

One creative training project in the former Communist bloc by Prof. Herman Schwartz from American University Law School brings judges and journalists together for a seminar on how press coverage of a transparent, accountable judiciary is helpful to both. But these are "parachute" seminars run by the Americans, and they should instead be sustained local efforts to build lasting professional relationships.

4. In many areas, there's too much aid and not enough requirements for getting the aid.

Suggestion: People who attend training or seminars should be required to take part in follow-up surveys, seminars and questionnaires, and they should be required to transmit their knowledge in their newsrooms and stations. The managers who send them should be required to agree to this, and monitor this. Further aid should be stopped if they don't fulfill these agreements.

Local people, no matter how well-intentioned, are often too much a part of the problem to see what is really needed in terms of quid pro quos or paybacks.

5. It's the people. Everything depends on the individuals involved. The local partners must be professionally respected, and the Westerners must be carefully chosen and prepared for the region. Language skills are a great plus.

"Too much training I've seen is not training. It's yapping. Lecturing. Talking. Crowing about the First Amendment. Western trainers talking about 'how I did it.' Not enough interactive training. Not enough practice in seminars so that people get actual learning, not just theory."

Ann Olson, Knight fellow

6. Bigger is not necessarily better. Quality is far more important than quantity.

7. Oversight, feedback and evaluations are crucial.

"The cost of oversight at the local level may be as much as 1/3 of the original budget and will necessitate decent computers and database expertise to keep good institutional records."

Ann Olson, Knight fellow

Indigenous organizations should be required to track the results, not the numbers, of the money they spend. The better evaluations are probably not the metric tabulations and regression analyses by American consultants and scholars, but rather feedback and impact assessments from knowledgeable players in the field.

8. Training programs need to weave together journalism values with technical journalism practice skills. Don't expect to succeed in building public service media if you teach one without the other.

"Tell them you are going to teach them how to be great disc jockeys; you are actually training them how to talk on the radio about HIV/AIDS. You weave ethics into every seminar, even those about management and sales."

David Hoffman, Internews

"Provide them with real skills; how to use a video camera, to edit. Teaching them how to be objective and free doesn't go over so well."

Manana Aslamazian, Internews

9. The training should be the beginning of a long-term relationship. Assistance organizations should form support/communication groups of those who have been trained. George Soros' OSI, Internews, Greenfield's Independent Journalism Foundation and others create leave-behind journalism organizations run by the locals, who are a continued presence for local journalists to turn to. The Knight fellows' extensive tour in country is a real plus. But U.S. Embassies and many others still use American "parachute professors" for one-shot seminars, whose impact is minimal.

10. Have different kinds of training in your toolbox: short workshops, long immersion training, practical advice, grants, research, traveling to U.S. or Europe, traveling to each other's stations, producing cooperative programming.

11. Journalism centers make a lot of sense in some regions, but not others. It often depends on the size of the service area and the quality of the local management.

Centers worked in Kiev, Ukraine and in Armenia, because journalists could get together for two or three hours and then go back to their communities. But in Russia, donors funded a center that became a boondoggle.

12. More up-to-date training materials and books are needed virtually everywhere.

13. One shouldn't just focus on the negatives about media in a country. There has to be a concrete positive incentive in each project for local people to make it their own and move forward. (Frank Vogl, Transparency International).

14. Teach the Internet!

Cross-platform digital training is the wave of the future, thanks to media technology convergence. The rise of Internet use in Africa proves that no place will be off the Internet screen for long.

This is a critical moment to intervene before restrictive Internet policies proliferate. A powerful argument to use with autocratic regimes is that if they want to be players in the world economy, their workers and resources have to be wired to the Internet.

15. But don't forget the old technologies. Community radio may be the best way to reach populations in Africa, Afghanistan, Pakistan and many other countries.