A Policy Brief by Ines Drefs and Barbara Thomass is now available.

Download at: http://www.mecodem.eu/publications/working-papers

Executive Summary
This policy brief puts forward suggestions for improved journalism support in the context of democratisation conflicts. It draws conclusions from interviews with journalists and media development actors.

Journalists in conflict societies frequently face critical working conditions. Our interviews with journalists from Egypt, Kenya, Serbia and South Africa identify political pressure and socio-economic insecurity, a lack of formal in-house training and juniorisation within the newsroom as well as exposure to violence, attempts at interference and a lack of resources on the ground. Trauma and ethical dilemmas create problems in all case study countries (see section 2).

Media development organisations regard polarisation and a lack of ethical standards as the main problems in conflict societies. Our interviews with both Europe-based and local media development actors show that their support programmes address journalists as enablers of an inclusive public discourse and as proponents of the human right to freedom of expression. Assistance for journalists increasingly considers the bigger newsroom structure, taking the form of long term counselling or mentoring and often focusing on professional standards and ethics (see section 3).

In addition, media development actors emphasise a need for increased coordination and cooperation within the sector, higher prioritisation of media development in foreign policy and a more thorough understanding of local conditions before commencing engagement on the ground (see section 4).

In view of these findings, this policy brief concludes with concrete recommendations as to how media development efforts can be better geared to the realities of conflict reporting, thus enhancing the effectiveness of support measures (see section 5).

The recommendations in brief:
• To consider the safety of journalists
• To take local conditions as a starting point
• To intensify research and evaluation activities
• To involve multiple stakeholders and facilitate exchange
• To prioritise long-term formats
• To make allowance for flexible budgets in media development projects
• To establish learning and exchange mechanisms between the various organisations that are active on the ground
• To apply a qualitative approach for evaluating media development projects

Empirical findings from interviews with journalists in Egypt, Kenya, Serbia, and South Africa are now available!

Download at: http://www.mecodem.eu/publications/working-papers

Executive summary:

This report provides an overview of core comparative findings from MeCoDEM interviews with journalists in Egypt, Kenya, Serbia and South Africa. It investigates the role of journalistic actors in transitional societies across a set of comparable democratisation conflicts and themes of inquiry: journalistic work practices, role perceptions, and ethical principles and dilemmas. Empirically, the study builds on qualitative semi-structured face-to face in-depth interviews with 100 professional journalists working for local news organisations in the four countries. Interviews employed the reconstruction method.

• The analysis indicates that to varying degrees, journalistic work practices, role perceptions, and ethical orientations could have both a productive and counterproductive impact on journalistic performance when covering democratisation conflicts. Consequently, the nature of the impact could inform journalism’s role in democratisation processes as likely either constructive or destructive.
• Journalists feel their professional work includes a range of potentially productive roles. These involve not only informing accurately and fairly about democratisation conflicts but also overseeing and questioning political authorities (watchdog role), investigating and explaining the contexts of conflicts (investigator and teacher), capturing voices of the voiceless and fighting for people’s rights (agent for social change), moderating between conflict parties and facilitating public debate, and finally seeking to keep the country together and to transmit messages of tolerance and peace (agent for peace).
• Journalists express commitment towards strong ethical ideals and values, for example, balanced and truthful reporting and consider it their ethical obligation to limit the likelihood of inciting violence. On the other hand, ethical ideals and values are at times overridden by journalists’ personal biases (national, racial, religious, moral etc.), potentially resulting in imbalanced portrayals of conflicts. Pursuit of objectivity was at times deemed destructive to democratisation, especially when reporting of conflicts necessitates inclusion of information which could incite violence.
• Within journalistic work practices, the following are understood to be the overall goals when presenting a conflict story: enhancing conflict-sensitive reporting as far as balancing different sides of a story, challenging ‘inciting’ voices, and responsible choice of words. Yet, the described logic of ‘sensationalising’ and (over)simplifying of news and focussing on violence when selecting and framing a story seem to considerably reduce chances for conflict-sensitive reporting.
• Cross-national comparative findings reflect specific country contexts and structural conditions to be a consistent factor that shapes journalistic work practices, role perceptions and ethical orientations. On the other hand, various cross-national similarities have been detected, including “universal” journalistic routines and logics when describing procedures of selecting topics, investigating and framing stories. However, intervening structural constraints might lead to different outcomes of these practices. Most journalists refer to similar journalistic roles while their concrete understanding and implementation of these might differ considerably. Journalists across all countries identify overarching guiding values of objectivity and truthfulness, but their application depends on the (country and conflict-specific) dilemmas they encounter.
• Finally, journalistic work practices, role perceptions and ethical orientations seem to vary depending on conflict type. The journalists’ individual perception of the conflict and the media outlet’s stance seem to be crucial intervening factors during reporting. Moreover, role perceptions differ depending on the conflict: While journalists highlight watchdog and investigative roles when reporting on ‘predominantly political’ conflicts such as election campaigns and conflicts over the distribution of power, acting as agents for social change and agents for peace seem to dominate when reporting on conflicts over citizenship and minority rights.

What are the structural conditions of journalism in Egypt, Kenya, Serbia and South Africa?
For answers to this question please consult Judith Lohner‘s, Sandra Banjac‘s and Irene Neverla‘s analysis. It is now available per country and as a comprehensive report.

Download at: http://www.mecodem.eu/publications/working-papers

Executive Summary
Based on a multi-dimensional scheme as a conceptual framework, this working paper maps the structural conditions relevant to journalism and conflict communication in Egypt, Kenya, Serbia and South Africa, using a wide range of country-specific academic literature and reports compiled by various non-academic organisations active in the media sector.

• ‘Structural conditions’ are to be understood as the totality of (formal and informal) orders and structures that characterise media and journalism in a certain space, most commonly, a country.
• Eleven interrelated and interdependent dimensions of structural conditions relevant to media and journalism have been extracted and adapted from existing literature, guiding structured and comprehensive analysis within specific (country) contexts: (1) historical development, (2) political system, (3) political culture, (4) media freedom, (5) level of state control and regulation of media by the state, (6) media ownership and financing, (7) structure of media markets and patterns of information distribution, (8) orientation of media, (9) political/societal activity and parallelism of media, (10) journalism culture, and (11) journalistic professionalism.
• Country reports feature a unique set and combination of structural factors shaping media and journalism in the four countries, demonstrating the importance of conflict communication as a case study with regard to structural conditions. For example, different degrees of democratisation regarding media structures become evident in varying levels of media freedom and state interference in the media sector. Moreover, there are significant differences in media landscapes and the structure of media markets, reflecting the different size, economic situation, infrastructure and cultural, ethnic and linguistic diversity of the four countries, as well as the differing degrees of literacy and spending power of inhabitants.
• As to cross-national similarities, media and journalism face highly complex, ambivalent, contradictory and changing structural conditions in all four countries. These are shaped by the legacies of a non-democratic past, hybrid forms of political governance and a political culture which features a strong cleavage of ideologies and high level of clientelism. The constitutional guarantee of media freedom which exists in all countries is challenged by ambivalent or openly repressive media laws and a reluctance of governments to implement fundamental media reforms. Accordingly, the state plays an important role in the media sector, mirrored in political influence especially in the governance of (public/state) broadcasting and regulatory bodies, financing and interference in editorial decisions. Journalists in all four countries are likely to face pressures, harassment and the risk of prosecution, leading to a considerable gap between legal provision and the practice of media freedom. Furthermore, all countries are confronted not only with a relatively high level of media concentration but also with a considerable degree of political ownership. While the journalistic profession faces challenges regarding journalistic education and training, professional organisation and self-regulation, journalists in all four countries execute their jobs under precarious conditions, marked by professional insecurity, low salaries, as well a low professional status and fragile social reputation.

Katrin Voltmer presented a paper on “Journalists and democratic transitions: Challenging western models of politics and media in South Africa” at the Political Studies Assiciation’s 66th annual conference.
Please see below for a slideshow of her presentation:

A literature review by Rebecca Pointer, Tanja Bosch, Wallace Chuma and Herman Wasserman on civil society, political activism and communications in democratisation conflicts is now available.

Download at: http://www.mecodem.eu/publications/working-papers

Executive Summary
Against the background of MeCoDEM Work Package 5, “Civil society, political activism and communications in democratisation conflicts”, this working paper examines the role of civil society organisations in democratisation. The paper particularly focuses on: how the media covers civil society activities; how civil society organisations communicate; and the potential of new Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) for delivering democratic change. Based on the literature review, the following observations emerged:

• It is not always clear that civil society and the state are playing separate roles or occupying separate terrains — depending on the state form, civil society can be inter alia embedded in state structures, working openly with the state, have a limited role in demanding services from the state, in active open opposition to the state, or working underground and hidden from view.
• Civil society cannot always be regarded as a democratising force — while it can play such a role, depending on context, it can be violent, and in some instances even opposed to broad-based equal rights for all. In addition, civil society groups might be focussed on minimalist demands — not broad or deep societal change.
• While some of the literature delineates between social and political activism — where political activism is directed at the state and social activism focuses on a range of causes, such as environmentalism, gender and LGBTIQ rights, and services such as housing — in the countries explored under this study, activism could not be neatly divided into one type or the other.
• Although there may be variations from one context to the next, the reality of conventional ‘news values’ informing news production in the legacy media mean that democratisation conflicts (or any other conflict for that matter), are likely to be framed as ‘events’, with emphasis on the spectacle, and ‘official’ sources such as spokespersons are likely to be given prominence even when their lived experiences are not integral to the conflict. Therefore, the underlying causes and complexities of civil society contestation are unlikely to be explored in the mainstream media.
• Though a range of factors limit activist access to the media, the media is not an un-budging monolith — at times it is receptive to calls for change, especially if an organisation achieves broad support through both media and non-media activities. Activists can also deploy their own “media”, which can involve a range of cultural activities and products, including newsletters, banners and pamphlets, films and photographs, clothing such as t-shirts, dramatic productions, etc..
• While ICTs and social media have risen as prominent terrains where civil society contestation can play out, these ICTs do not work in isolation, but in relation to other forms of communication — including mainstream media and interpersonal communication — so the impact of ICTs on contestation and democracy depends on the media, social, economic and political context in which they are deployed.

A concept paper by Tanja Bosch on the multidisciplinary field of Memory Studies is now available.

Download at: http://www.mecodem.eu/publications/working-papers

Executive Summary
The paper outlines the evolution of the multidisciplinary field of memory studies, from the first use of the term collective memory in the early 1900s. It provides some context to the use of the terms collective memory, cultural memory, historical memory, cultural memory etc. The paper argues that the MeCoDEM project can draw upon conceptual notions from the field of memory studies, in order to interrogate the media’s role in constructing and disseminating collective memories of conflict in the transitional countries we are studying.

The paper presents:

• A discussion of the methods used in memory studies, explaining how attention to questions of methodology has been limited in memory studies because much research has been more concerned with theoretical issues. The paper reflects on the methods from oral history, as well as other methods such as discourse analysis, which has been used in processes of remembering, showing how people co-construct the past in their joint production of the social worlds they inhabit through speech and language.
• Some thoughts about how memory studies and media studies intersect, particularly given that the mass media plays a key role in the constitution of memory – and the politics of remembering is intrinsically connected to power.
•  A brief discussion of the critiques of memory studies, mainly that the field has not paid attention to the problem of reception (in terms of methods and sources) and thus cannot illuminate the sociological basis of historical representations.

A key concept paper by Antje Glück is now available. Glueck outlines and critically discusses the main scholarly debate(s) surrounding De-Westernisation.

Download at: http://www.mecodem.eu/publications/working-papers/

Executive Summary
The paper outlines the main debates surrounding De-Westernisation, which addresses global imbalances in the creation and distribution of academic knowledge. In addition to providing a comprehensive overview of the field, the working paper suggests further steps in order to enrich a global set of philosophical, social and political theories. The paper foregrounds East and South Asia, as well as Africa, in its consideration of non-Western philosophical traditions.

The following observations can be summarised:

• De-Westernisation concerns all stages of the research process; across professional academic cultures, theoretical and methodological perspectives and the choice of research subjects.
• The main criticisms revolve around a dominant elitist Western axiology and epistemology, with synchronous neglect of indigenous philosophical traditions. The paper points to some of the historical reasons for why indigenous concepts remained under-researched.
• The current state of research is characterised by countries of the global South remaining at the ‘periphery’, while the ‘hegemonic centre’ is largely occupied by Northern America, Europe and Australia. Funding inequalities create persistent asymmetrical structures in academic cooperation, with research largely initiated within Western countries. This rift is further deepened by deploying Western approaches with little localised adaptation or the integration of local frameworks.
• Suggestions to overcome those imbalances comprise: the improvement of academic infrastructures in countries of the global South, including cooperation in research, journal and publishing activities; the development of ‘indigenous’ instruction textbooks; the acceptance of regional differences versus universalism; and more self-reflective academic cultures.

MeCoDEM’s research focus shifts to political communication in its third and last research phase. Under the direction of Nicole Stremlau MeCoDEM country teams will interview members of parliament, ministers and tribal chiefs as well as analyse of speeches and laws during the next six months. The acquired insights will inform the project’s findings on media representation, journalistic ethics and political activism. Taken together they enable MeCoDEM to advance the understanding of communication dynamics in democratisation conflicts.

More information: http://www.mecodem.eu/events/team-meetings/#belgrade

A concept paper by Katy Parry and Giorgia Aiello on diverse cultural forms relevant to studying political culture and communication is now available.

Download at: http://www.mecodem.eu/publications/working-papers/

Executive Summary

This short concept paper introduces ideas for how MeCoDEM might bring ‘culture’ into the project. It sets out how diverse cultural forms are significant to the construction and negotiation of stories, narratives, frames, images and memories that circulate, especially for our interest, during times of conflict. It also highlights how culture contributes to the re-configurations of politics, identities and institutions in times of transition. We are especially interested in how cultural practices give voice or visibility to particular actors and constituencies through the media, how they may contribute to breaking down virtual, digital and physical barriers between individuals or communities, and what is at stake in mediated cultural outputs that start to form collective memory.
The paper presents:

• A summary on how expressive, artistic and symbolic aspects are relevant to studying political culture and communication.
• Four possible paths of enquiry which take seriously the cultural dimension: Intersections with popular culture; activist use of the arts; cultural projects that address identity and memory; and individual expressions of resistance.
• An outline of three possible overlapping approaches to the cultural dimensions of the research: Mapping existing cultural outputs; Artistic/photography projects; visual research methods.