In the following pages, the focus is on best practices and lessons learned in the field of media-based peacebuilding. The discussion includes sections on preparation and assessment, project design, implementation, and evaluation.
Preparation and assessment
Preparation should begin with an assessment of the conflict, of the environment
in which the conflict takes place, and of the role the media has played in the
development of the conflict, which should include a comprehensive review of
the media environment. Finally a baseline survey of whatever the project is
expected to change in terms of attitudes, practices, actions etc. will provide
information against which the effectiveness of the project can eventually be
measured.
The assessment will help determine the feasibility of the project, and/or the most effective form of intervention. It should also help the implementing agency determine how a media-based intervention might compare with other strategies.
Some of the issues that must be considered in a media assessment include:
During this initial assessment phase it is important to reflect on the presumed and/or proposed objectives and to refine and modify those objectives based on the assessment findings. Here, it's worth noting that with respect to the setting of objectives no intervention should be viewed in a vacuum. Other peacebuilding activities may already be underway, and while a media-focused project may not be part of a larger effort itself, the implementing agency should seek synergy with complementary activities by other organisations. Media interventions can benefit, for example, from other apparently unrelated activities such as civil society or law reform initiatives which strengthen the media-supportive infrastructure of legislation, courts and regulators.
Next, it is essential for all media-related interventions, but especially for those focusing on the development and training of journalists, to assess the media itself. This involves examining the extent of any infrastructure which supports the media, the media environment in general, and any limitations on media activities. There is some risk, for example, in training journalists in accuracy, impartiality and socially responsible reporting without also discussing strategies to overcome the implicit dangers of corrupt legislators, anti-democratic media laws, a dishonest judiciary and non-existent or corrupt media regulators. The legal and constitutional environment which enables reliable journalism includes legislation governing the media sector such as freedom of speech, adherence to international covenants such as Article 19, as well as media rights and responsibilities including libel and copyright laws.
It is also important to be realistic about the possibilities and limitations of a media project, to value small successes, and in hot conflicts the importance of simply maintaining and supporting the idea of peace among those who believe that conflict isn't either part of the solution or the answer. In the same way, activities which contribute to the strengthening of civil society and of democratic institutions have inherent value in that they reduce the risks of violent conflict.
For information on conflict and context assessment in general (that is, without regard to media) readers should consult other sources for a range of useful methodologies1.
Design
The next step is to design the project. The implementing agency is faced with
several fundamental decisions at this point.
The most crucial choice concerns the form the project takes. A great variety of effective projects have been attempted in the recent past. The following section contains examples of projects using radio drama, training activities, video, and radio production; projects to secure better media access, to support journalists working under difficult and dangerous conditions, to provide information to specific target groups with special needs, and to achieve reconciliation, and to build bridges between parties on opposite sides of a divide. In addition, many of the best projects include not just a media activity, but also an integrated training element, so that continuation of the project is not dependent on outside personnel. And while sustainability in conflict zones may not be top of the list of priorities it is essential to consider what happens when the 'hot conflict' is over, and donor interest subsides even though conflict could break out again very easily.
Although the choice of target audience will generally be determined by the project's stated objectives, this is not always self-evident. For example, a programme which attempts to teach non-violent conflict resolution techniques might target youth, but it might also target teachers, or even journalists. In some cases, the net is cast wide: where there is a perceived need for accurate or balanced information, or where there is an attempt to reduce tensions by increasing access to the perspectives of all the parties to a conflict, the general public may be the target. In other cases, in efforts to strengthen the foundations of an independent media, for example, the target audience may be a select group of editors or producers and managers. And several of the cases discussed in the following section are concerned with improving journalists' skills - either in general, or with respect to the special problems associated with reporting in areas of conflict.
A third choice, if the intervention relates to journalism, is to determine
the 'intervention type' (drawing on the analysis by Ross Howard developed in
chapter 1):
1. rudimentary journalism
2. journalism development
3. transitional journalism
4. media-based journalism, or
5. intended outcome journalism.
Finally, the findings from the assessment related to 'reach' and 'access' are critical in terms of choosing the type of media to be used. In other words, to consider the target audience in relation to the type of media it is most exposed to, or has greatest access to.
The process of deciding the nature of the project, the target audience, intervention type and the medium needs to be parallel and iterative - that is, each choice has to be considered in relation to the other choices, and the project objectives. Then, as the various options related to each decision are weighed, their impact on the other options also need to be taken into account.
Having said that, certain factors should be integrated into the design stage of every project. The success of most projects will be dependent on establishing local partnerships. The sooner such partnerships are established, the greater the sense of investment on the part of the partners. If local partners are involved in the design stage, their input can help get the project off to a good start, and they will become stakeholders with a vital interest in a successful outcome. 'Local' here can mean local at the grass roots level, but it can also mean 'local' in the sense of individuals and organisations operating in the project area, even on the national or regional level. For example, of the projects described in this book, the radio soap opera produced in Senegal has benefited enormously from the co-operation and assistance of the state-owned broadcasting system. Equally, the Women's Media Centre, the Cambodian Communications Institute, and the Royal University of Phnom Penh all make significant contributions to the radio journalists' training project in Cambodia.
The prospects for sustainability and success are both greatly enhanced when the project design is flexible. The one thing that is certain is that the unexpected will occur, so the project must be able to respond to the unexpected. The project design should, therefore, include an ongoing monitoring and evaluation process.
Implementation
In conflict areas, where trust is generally in short supply, organisational
transparency is crucial. It must be clear that there is nothing to hide, and
no secret agenda. One element of an overall effort to establish and maintain
credibility is to adopt a code of ethics, which includes not only rules of conduct
on the business and organisational side, but which also addresses the issues
of journalistic ethics. For example, Fondation Hirondelle, a Swiss-based NGO
engaged in media projects in a number of conflict situations (including Radio
Okapi described in the following section), asks all journalists who work with
it to abide by a code which commits them to uphold professional ethical standards
regarding accuracy and the clear delineation between facts and opinion2. Credibility
also requires that those engaged in media projects need to be transparent about
their involvement with any political groups, for example - without this a media
project can be easily redirected to serve a political goal.
A pro-active public relations approach can be extremely effective in winning 'hearts and minds', building good will, and gaining the confidence of the community and the target audience. The project should demonstrate fairness and balance by giving diverse perspectives a voice, while remaining cautious regarding the broadcast of extreme views. And can demonstrate trust and credibility by implicating people from a wide cross section of the population. This in turn should address the concerns of parties on all sides of the divide, by providing people from opposing sides with an opportunity to present their interests, while avoiding giving space to their positions. In addition, media-based projects need to be acutely attuned to cultural sensitivities within the communities they serve. Local partners have an important role to play, and they should be encouraged to provide guidance - or sound the alarm if need be - if a well-meaning but ignorant outsider is about to wander into a cultural minefield.
Both outside (in day-to-day activities, and in more PR-directed activities) and inside peacebuilding programmes, language - broadly construed - is also a crucial factor. This 'language' is not a matter of words alone, but of gestures too. Media (and other) projects need to send out the right signals within the community where they work, to set the right tone, to be not just good communicators and listeners, but also to know when to say nothing at all. Loretta Hieber points to a costly misjudgement in Kosovo, when a new radio station was set up and the international community selected the individuals who would present the news. "According to local Kosovar Albanian journalists," she writes, "the news immediately lost credibility because ... the messenger (the television announcer) didn't represent the community."3
When it comes to content, it is also crucially important to use the language appropriate to the target audience. In DR Congo, for example, Radio Okapi, a nation-wide radio network established to provide reliable, information to the entire Congolese listening audience, broadcasts in the four most prevalent Congolese languages, and in French - the lingua franca of the educated. In Sierra Leone, Talking Drum Studio produces a range of radio programmes aimed at a number of very different target audiences; programmes which aim to reach a broader public may be broadcast in standard English, while programmes aimed at rural women and ex-combatants employ the 'creolised' form of English called Krio. In Macedonia, producers faced a real challenge in the children's TV drama (for children 8 to 12) 'Nashe Maalo', which helps bridge the ethnic divides existing between the majority Macedonian and minority Albanian and Roma populations. Most of the programme is in Macedonian, but as storylines have developed since the programme was launched in 1998, more and more of what takes place has been in minority languages. All programmes are broadcast over both the Macedonian language and the Albanian language stations, and in each case those portions not in the dominant language are subtitled. Even as the media can help bring about a solution, it is also, inevitably seen as being a part of the conflict. All parties in a conflict will try to manipulate the media, and will take note of any media-based peacebuilding activity. If governments, warlords or business interests are antagonistic to the aims of a peacebuilding project they will spread misinformation about it, and may attempt to control or even to close it down. Governments may decide to ban interviews with certain individuals, political parties or opposition groups. While another, particularly insidious form of manipulation is the appropriation of the language of peacebuilding by political interests inimical to peace.
Beyond these considerations, which are integral to the establishment of credibility, there is one further consideration which cannot be overlooked; the media product has to be entertaining and compelling in and of itself. The target audience does not generally choose to read, view, or listen because they have a deep commitment to peacebuilding, even if they are anxious to see tensions reduced and conflicts resolved. Just as speaking the wrong language, setting the wrong tone, or damaging credibility in other ways can doom a project, producing an expensive dud is unlikely to have any notable impact on a conflict situation. It is not surprising then, that some of the most effective tools for peacebuilding through the media have been well-produced and well-written serial radio dramas (soaps) in which the message is communicated via the storyline.
It is important, then, to test the concept and the initial effort, and to continue to test and monitor throughout the duration of a project. Wherever possible, producers should go the extra mile to ensure audience feedback.
Time and timing are also important factors; it takes time to produce results, and it takes timing to maintain relevance by addressing 'hot topics' and producing programmes that reflect current realities.
One of the most experienced and successful organisations involved in media-based
peacebuilding interventions is the European Centre for Common Ground (and its
sister organisation, Search for Common Ground), which is active in the Balkans,
Cyprus, Ukraine, Angola, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Burundi, DR Congo, and in Indonesia.
Its media wing, Common Ground Productions (CGP), adheres to four main principles
in its numerous radio projects:
1. establish radio studios engaged in programme-making, rather than broadcast
radio stations, in order to reduce the risk of being shut down in hot conflict
zones; 2. collaborate closely with local stations, international NGOs, and private
businesses involved in media activities;
3. build and maintain a politically and ethnically balanced staff; and
4. establish and maintain impartial and 'non-conflictual' production techniques.
CGP also uses an approach to programming, developed by the late Dr. Ed Palmer, which embraces two fundamental ideas: 'curriculum-based programming', and 'responsive programming'. Curriculum-based programming means determining in advance what topics should be covered and what measurable results should be achieved, and then reflecting on progress towards the goals during the course of the project. Responsive programming is programming that changes in response to the changing circumstances - audience needs, changes in the nature of a conflict or political environment, the degree of success in communicating ideas and achieving goals, etc.
Evaluation
Evaluation is not about establishing 'certainties', or even about 'proving'
anything. Rather, it is a process, which helps us see more clearly what it is
we are doing, and the nature of the issues being confronted. It is a 'way of
seeing'4.
Ongoing monitoring of media-based peacebuilding activities should be built into the project, as should an evaluation process at conclusion. But just how does one gauge the success of media-based peacebuilding activities? In the preceding section Common Ground's Lisa Shochat, Phil Bob Hellmich and Allen Scheid discussed a range of methodologies employed in assessment and evaluation of media-based peacebuilding activities. In this section, the focus is on a few recommended strategies which can facilitate the evaluation process.
Generally speaking, substantial evaluation has been the greatest shortcoming of a decade of media interventions in conflicts, largely because it is extremely difficult to measure attitudinal and behaviour change. It is always possible to measure how many listeners or readers a programme or a series of articles reaches, but measuring whether they understood the point of the programme or article is less easy, while measuring whether they modified their attitudes or behaviour as a result of the programme or article is extremely difficult.
Many interventions report their success in terms of project deliverables, and this is especially true of media-training initiatives. But these type of evaluations should determine not only how many journalists went through the training or how many media-supportive laws were passed, but also how much the standard of reliable journalism was raised, over what determined period, or how much the regulatory decisions were improved as a result of the project.
This goes way beyond measuring audience receptivity or feedback and is likely
to involve extensive research, data collection and analysis so as to be able
to separate the impact of the media intervention from that of other initiatives,
or indeed from the environment in general. Evaluation needs to be integrated
into project planning from inception with, for example, a baseline survey measuring
current attitudes and behaviour as related to those the project hopes to influence
and alter. Clearly, the quality of the information gathered for an evaluation
is a function of the questions asked. In its paper Working with the Media in
Conflicts and other Emergencies, the British government's Department for International
Development (DFID) raises the crucial questions:
Is the information useful?
Is it having the anticipated impact?
If not, why not?5
DFID notes that often, 'the message received is not the message broadcast'. So one goal of the evaluation process should be to discern what precisely is the message received, and then to make appropriate adjustments which ensure that the message received corresponds as closely as possible to the intended message. One way of achieving the above is to make feedback, informal and formal, an ongoing part of the media project itself.
Thus, quantitative evaluations which may provide information on the popularity of programmes should be de-emphasised in favour of qualitative assessment capable of helping programme makers produce programmes that contribute in meaningful ways to peace and stability, and reflect the needs and interests of the audience.
Hieber, while acknowledging that every project is different, and requires a somewhat different approach to evaluation, nonetheless suggests a set of useful indicators by which evaluators can benchmark a project. She divides the indicators into three basic categories - those dealing with the media environment, those dealing with the conflict, and those dealing with the implementation.
Another useful methodology was developed by Dr. Ed Palmer for Search for Common Ground - the 'Rapid Survey Method'6. In conflict areas the lack of local survey capacity, the technical and logistical difficulties of conducting field work, and the high cost of conducting adequate surveys with limited budgets, inevitably deter effective evaluation processes. As an alternative to standard evaluation techniques, Palmer developed the low-cost, non-standard Rapid Survey Method.
One of the keys to this methodology is to select a limited number of audience categories and establish a specified number of respondents within each category to be surveyed - relative to total audience. The surveyors then conduct the surveys in high traffic areas such as markets, food distribution centres, or refugee camps. In general, between 10 and 40 individuals are interviewed for each category. Questions focus on 1) the reach of the project; 2) reactions of various stakeholders to gauge the impact on different target groups; and 3) measurement of outcomes through questions on knowledge, attitudes and actions to evaluate programme effectiveness.
Peace journalism
In many conflicts the act of reporting is likely to have a more immediate impact
on the course of a conflict than even the most thoughtfully designed intervention.
Traditionally, journalists have learnt to maintain strict neutrality, to be
objective observers, and to stick to the facts. These are essential principles,
and reliable journalism can have a distinct, positive impact on a conflict.
In the words of Robert Karl Manoff, director of the Centre for War, Peace and the News Media, when a peace process is underway, "the simple act of eliciting ideas and reporting on them [can] assist the dynamic of the more formal mediation process itself." In other words, conventional reliable journalism, even if it's not imbued with any special peacebuilding intention, has an inherent peacebuilding effect. While in hot conflicts reliable journalism can provide the population with information which reduces the power and spread of rumours which feed distrust and negative stereotyping.
But there is also the downside of traditional journalism. Johan Galtung, one of the pioneers in the field of peace studies and director of Transcend, makes the point when he distinguishes between what he calls 'peace/conflict journalism' and 'war/violence journalism'. Drawing an analogy from the world of medical science, he considers a world in which only disease, rather than medical practice is reported. That sort of journalism would be 'disease-oriented. "Fortunately," he writes, "reporting on health and disease has liberated itself from that fatalistic tradition. There is also a clear tradition of health journalism ...but there is not yet a corresponding tradition of 'peace journalism', whereas 'war and violence journalism' seem to be in good standing."7 Galtung suggests a short list of questions to guide 'peace correspondents':
1 What is the conflict about? What are the parties and what are their real
goals, including the parties beyond the immediate arena of violence? 2 What
are the deeper roots of the conflict, structural and cultural, including the
history of both? 3 What visions exist about outcomes other than one party imposing
itself on the other - what particularly creative, new ideas? Can such ideas
be sufficiently powerful to prevent violence?
4 If violence occurs, what about invisible effects such as trauma and hatred,
and the desires for revenge and more glory?
5 Who is working to prevent violence, what are their visions of conflict outcomes,
their methods and how can they be supported?
6 Who is initiating genuine reconstruction, reconciliation and resolution, and
who is only reaping benefits like reconstruction contracts?
Notes
1 For an overview, see 'Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment Methodology: Evolving Art Form or Dead End?' http://www.berghof-center.org/handbook/hoffman/index.htm, including the reference page.
2 See www.hirondelle.org
3 Hieber, p. 52
4 Hieber is quoting here from Media in Development: Towards a Toolkit in communication, monitoring and impact assessment methodologies, p. 7, ICHR-Radio Partnership, 1998.
5 Department for International Development (United Kingdom). 'Working with the Media in Conflicts and other Emergencies,' p. 40, August, 2000.
6 Palmer, Ed. 'The CGP Rapid Survey Method: A New Survey Tool For Broadcasters In War Zones.' http://www.sfcg.org/documents/palmer.txt. A detailed description of the methodology is beyond the scope of this article. See Palmer's original document, or Hieber, p. 181-185 for an in-depth discussion of the Rapid Survey Method. Much of the material presented here is drawn from Hieber's discussion of Palmer's methodology.
7 Galtung, Johan. 'High Road, Low Road', Track Two, December, 1998, p. 7-10. These observations and the additional citations appearing here all come from this same article.