Theorising media-democracy

1. Theorising media-democracy in African conditions

2. Definitions: (methodology) • Two institutions: Media & Democracy • But historically specific forms • So look at processes & functions. • African democracy vs Western? • Apples & oranges should still be “fruit”, not vegetables! • Can compare Africa to “Normative Ideal” • But try to explain, not merely describe, the deficit

3. Universalisable categories • Democracy • Majority principle, • Equal rights, • Associated principles (informed voters, rule of law, human rights, checks and balances, nation state). • Media • Vehicle or carrier of signs, • Radio, tv, etc., • Inc. fashion and …. mass rallies, songs, meetings.

4. Conventional wisdom • Liberal pluralism view of media-democracy: • Media role as independent watchdog for citizens = fairness for competing political parties, esp at elections. • This role is normally held up as the ideal “Standard”. • True, we can measure deficit/shortfall in Africa … • but that does not explain why media is falling short, • and it doesn’t question the adequacy of the “Standard”.

5. Conventional wisdom • Assumptions underpinning liberal pluralist view of media and democracy. • Democracy is about elite parties & elections, period. • We can classify media systems according to the Standard role of independent watchdog: • Liberal, social-responsible, authoritarian, communist • “Liberal pluralism role is operational in First World” • Dense media system. • Media should (and can) be neutral and pluralistic. • All these assumptions can be criticised – esp from the point of view of media-democracy in Africa.

6. Other paradigms • Public sphere – diff assumptions to lib pluralism • Democracy = open to all (not only to political & economic elites and political parties); not only at elections. • The state has to operate in regard to public opinion. • Role: Media should lubricate participation in ongoing public debate.

7. Other paradigms • Civil society – alsodiff assumptions to lib pluralism • Democracy needs voices of NGOs and CBOs. • In this way, the state is kept democratic. • Media should continuously bolster these groups against the powerful, esp. the State (sometimes also big business). • Civic journalism & public journalism • Cyberdemocracy

8. Other paradigms: questions • Public sphere: • Qtn: Singular or plural? • Qtn: Keane’s micro, meso, macro levels • Qtn: Includes Civil Society and State? • Qtn: Private realm and government realm? • Civil Society: • Qtns: One or more Civil Societies? • Qtns: Is business included?

9. Analysis: Civil Society • Non-state activities • Organisations, churches, media • Burial societies, stokvels, culture gps, NGOs • Civil society • Can a country have many civil societies? • Ans: Sometimes (eg. “two nations”) • Should business be included in CS? • Ans: Sometimes (eg. not WSIS, WSSD)

10. Civil Society- media questions • State-linked media not seen as part of CS. • But … is private media - as a business - in or out of CS? • What about non-profit or small community media? • Is the private media (commercial or community) different to the rest of CS? • How important is it for CS to have its own media?

11. Civil Society- media questions Looking more closely at CS perspective: What is private media’s democratic role? • Many complications exist … which show some of the insights and some of the problems of a Civil Society perspective on media-role.

12. Civil Society- complications 1 • A. 2 realms: but CS is not so distinct from state • What about tertiary institutions? Chiefs? • Often there is a culture of fear of the State among journos, and assumption that controls are tighter than they are. • So …not a Chinese Wall between CS & State • B. Interconnection: • Yes, CS is a check and balance to state power… • But often there is articulation with, & integration into, the State

13. Civil Society- complications 2 • C. Dualistic thinking: • “state bad, civil society good” • But what of democratic qualities in state? • What when private media or journalists are part of the problem? • D. Interdependence: • Assumption is: strong CS, & preferably weaker State • But it may well be that a strong State is necessary for a strong CS!

14. Civil Society- complications 3 • E. Democratic eligibility of CS elements?: • Govts often see private media as anti-patriotic • But: democracy encompasses all interests (Traber) • I.e. even those that are unelected like the media! • Is it all of CS that is democratic? No: • CS can be anti-democratic (eg. settlers, vigilantes) • Tho: even illegal groups can be pro-democracy. • F. Thin social density: • There is indeed rural sparseness of CS • However, look at social movements & media flow

15. Civil Society- complications 4 • G. Focus is on media-govt relations: • But how does media relate to the rest of CS? • Is “independent” media really independent? • H. Counterpositioning issue: • Media people as “the Opposition” • What when they get into power?

16. Civil Society- complications 5 • I. Reductionism: • Conflating CS with demands forchange? What about demands againstchange? • What about ordinary times when CS is apolitical? • Still, mere existence of CS can be a significant factor. • J. Summing up CS complexities: • Can’t apply willy-nilly to African media

17. End of part 1

18. Civil Society- conclusion 1 • Contrary to CS: • Media in CS is not a world cut off from State influence. • State media – like tertiary institutions - can in principle play a pro-CS role. • Non-state media can be dependent & even co-opted by governments. • State has democratic potential while media can be part of problem. • Private media may need strong state (eg. to protect journalists against mafia – Cardosa case).

19. Civil Society- conclusion 2 • In favour of CS: • Despite being unelected, private media is not disqualified from democratic role. • Private media is indeed scarce, but it can still have important impact. • CS is an important democratic counter to government’s having too much power. • But we need to look beyond media-State relations, to media-CS relations and to media-business relations.

20. Civil Society- conclusion 3 • Mixed assessment: • CS should acknowledge that some private media people are a political Opposition, • this is democratically legitimate, but it is not a media role as such. • Like CS, media is not per se politically and democratically relevant, • Yet, this can still be an important parameter – and limit - for how the State can use power. ---------------------------------------------------------

21. Paradigm: Public Sphere • Sees soul of democracy as participative debate. • Original concept by Habermas has been criticised for romanticism and sexism. • But concept revived in order to understand media’s role in democracy. • PS refers to that “space” in society in which the public can “gather” as such, discuss and make decisions.

22. Assumptions in Public Sphere • Public (opinion): • Assumes that majority views become dominant • Assumes there should be equal rights to participation • It impacts on policy & the exercise of power • Sphere (of influence): • contrasts to governmental sphere & private sphere • Note: Not all democratic politics is public sphere discourse: • Can be direct action • Note: Not all public sphere politics are democratic.

23. Analysing Public Sphere • Nonetheless, the PS is a strategically important “place” to look at in understanding democracy. • Media role in the public sphere: • It facilitates participation • It impacts on policy & the exercise of power through public opinion • It is a central institution if there is to be democracy via debate & dialogue about alternatives.

24. Public Sphere compared to Civil Society • CS tends towards grassroots focus • PS tends to elitism (like liberal pluralism): • Focuses on those who access the “space” or the “media”. • What is the connection between PS & CS? • PS exists between state and CS (Traber) • CS creates PS (Mansson) • Above = abrupt marriage, but …there is a link: • Public Sphere without Civil Society is sterile • CS without PS lacks an effectuating mechanism • (CS has other political influence too: riots, individual non-cooperation, lobbying, corruption … but democracy gives weight to discussion and debate in the PS)

25. Public Sphere compared to Civil Society • Beware an abrupt marriage, but …there is a link: • Public Sphere without Civil Society is sterile • CS without PS lacks an effectuating mechanism • (Note: CS has other political influence too: riots, individual non-cooperation, lobbying, corruption … but from Habermas’ perspective democracy gives weight to discussion and debate in the PS)

26. PS & CS on the role of media. 1 • Similarities: • Both CS and PS see a democratic role for media, • but both are instrumentalist, and ignore the institutional character of media enterprises. • Different emphases: • Media is a central institution for democracy in the PS. • CS sees a broad definition of media (t-shirts, songs). • PS is info-focused, blind to entertainment. • CS is more gender-sensitive re: democracy. • PS recognises need for the State.

27. PS & CS on the role of media. 2 • CS sees role for community & commercial media. • PS adds a role for media outside of CS, • i.e. public service media • Significant policy implications: • PS: need a Public Broadcasting System (PBS) • CS: danger of govt control, and competition with commercial & community media: “so privatise it”. • PS allows for mixed system: impartial PBS, + partisan private media, + even govt media.

28. PS & CS on role of media. 3 • CS: gives us a focus on the role of one sector: the private media (commercial & community). • PS: All media relevant, not just private media. – a totality of voices needed, • It suggests PS-style ethics of fairness, balance. • However, the degree of pluralism across the whole spectrum is ultimately what is important. • PS: holistic – looks at role of all media (but what about clothing, mass rallies, etc?).

29. PS & CS on role of media. 4 • CS suggests rights against the state; • PS suggests rights through the state. • PS has a strategic view of the State so that growing media’s democratic role should include: • Transforming government-controlled media to PBS • Using the courts • Promoting and deepening the notion of citizenship. • But qtn of citizenship: who’s in, who’s out?

30. PS & CS on role of media. 5 • PS suggests citizenship and “civility” • Protocols, ethics, rules of procedure • Has clear bearing on journalistic behaviour • Like CS, PS has to be qualified for use in Africa • Recognise how govt power shapes the PS & role that CS can play. • Both concepts complement each other, and … • Both have implications for understanding media role.

31. Women, the poor, minorities? Summing up: The Marginalised

32. Relevance of CS & PS theories: • Where there is State repression: • Civil Society role remains NB (CS) • Public judiciary is a potentially progressive factor. (PS) • Legal regime (cf PS) is important. • Alliance of media with CS is called for. • African State is needed for media enabling role: • To operate a genuine PBS • Re-regulation for broadcast pluralism • Empowerment of marginalised groups (eg. MDDA) • Media’s role in African citizenship is important.

33. Limits of each paradigm: • Of the PS paradigm: • The private sphere is very NB: • Rape, child abuse • Gender relations, sexuality • Aids • Of the CS paradigm: • Horizontal issues are important for media: • not just democracy as regards who controls the State.

34. Limits of both paradigms: • Media are not free-floating & autonomous: • State control: a danger esp for PBS. • Cronyism • Advertising & other pressure • Thus, media can be sucked into govt sphere. • Commercialisation: a danger for CS view • Collapse in standards • Issue of media councils

35. Horizons: • Paradigms and policy: • Recognition that there are different roles for public, commercial and community media. • Globalization: • Nowadays: we operate in a transnational public space with diasporas, donors, etc. • Needed: an African continent public space with active civil society participation. • African cybersphere has potential.

36. Retracing ground covered: • We have gone into: • Methodological issues • CS and PS concepts • Synthesis model advanced • Limitations noted

37. The end • The underlying issue is: • media in relation to power, participation, policy, practices. • Remember that democracy is an end in itself, not merely a means to development. • Can we export theory & understanding of media role in democracy, drawing from African cases?.