“Media has been described as the lynchpin or connective tissue of democracy.”
of the state on public broadcasting, public information, access to information, telecommunications, advertising, basic constitutional provisions related to freedom of expression, privacy laws, Internet and new media to name but a few of the more substantial sectors. In addition to the legal and regulatory framework of media policy of a new state, part of the process of media development must also factor in local economic concerns. Such areas of work that require attention include privatization, re-structuring of the state broadcaster into a viable public service broadcaster that is adequately financed and administered, and helping media outlets adapt to the new market-driven forces of a liberal economy. Economic constraints of a transition society cannot be underestimated.They affect the commercial viability of media, begging questions such as how to pay for the public service broadcaster and whether to impose license fees or not, i.e. whether to follow the model of the Holy Grail of Public Service Broadcasters, the BBC, or how to develop marketing strategies to help newly formed commercial stations survive. Questions of financial survival are, it seems, the most important to consider, after basic legal and regulatory concerns related to the establishment of free and independent media.
4 See Silvio Waisbord, “Communication and the MDGs: No Magic Information Bullets,” in Media Development, in WACC’s Media Development, 2006/3 http://www.wacc.org.uk/wacc/publications/media_development/2006_3/communication_and_the_mdgs_no_magic_inf ormation_bullets 5 Asante cites the work of Wilbur Schramm (1964), wherein he cites that mass media are agents of social change, which affects behavior. Schramm’s contention is that media can change behavior, changes attitudes, beliefs, skills and social norms. Also noteworthy is Asante’s larger discussion related to mass media development and how it has factored into the modernization literature, and is revered as a positive dimension of democracy building and societal transformation. In Gunther and Mughan’s study (2000), media facilitated democratization by eroding the credibility and legitimacy of the nondemocratic regime; developed pluralism in political attitudes, preferences, and partisan alternatives; and re-socialized both the masses and elites to the new democratic regimes.
That media matter is not such a hard case to support, but exactly how it matters and what it actually does, in the context of development, whether by contributing to the health of the economy, polity, or society, has been the focus of considerable 47 debate. This debate is nothing new, and arguably, modernization theory advanced by social scientists of the 1950s and 1960s, for better or worse, provides both the precursor and foundation for much of development communication and media development programs that are administered today as well as many of the debates that have been waged about the value and importance of media in development as well as democratic terms. In stating the case for why media matters, it has been described as the lynchpin or connective tissue of democracy (Gunther and Mughan 2000), as the ‘health’ of the state depends in large part of information flows, communication systems, and the ability for people to impart and receive information in an unhindered and unobstructed way. Moreover, access to information, freedom of expression, access to technology, high rates of literacy, access to a wide range and diversity of views, and the ability to consume media with a public interest agenda are 5 regarded as a pre-condition for a modern democratic state. The reasons for this abound. First, media cuts across several sectors of society economic, social and political. It is important to a country’s culture and identity. It can have a public service function, imparts knowledge, news and information, as well as offering a source for entertainment and other kinds of programming. Moreover, many would argue that without a free and independent media sector, the process of facilitating democracy and trying to get better governance systems to take root in societies without a real history of any sort of democratic governance would not be possible. In this light, media is often regarded as an agent of change or a facilitator of democratization (Asante 1997 and Gunther and Mughan 2000). As the so-called watchdog of the government, media serves a check and balance function by monitoring governments and political processes, i.e. elections and legislative actions. Media has the additional function of serving as an intermediary between the government and the people.
MEDIA MATTERS SECTION 4: Mapping the Sector: Literature, Surveys and Resources
AN EMERGING RESEARCH AGENDA
190