Democracy, Development and the Media

In this presentation for the University of Uppsala Collegium for Development Studies, James Deane argues that sustainable development depends on media focused on the challenges facing people who are economically poor and powerless. He argues that without debate, action, and leadership, democracies will exist only in name, not substance. Hence, development actors should take a more active interest in the role of media in the world's developing countries.


Deane begins by rooting his discussion in different conceptions of democracy and different conceptions of media. "The essence of this argument ... focuses on the extent to which democracy is procedural (what has also been referred to as minimalist), or substantive (what has also been termed substantial)." He names the following as elements of procedural democracy: free and fair elections; the existence of independent institutions, such as a judiciary; the separation of the legislature from the executive; and the existence of some form of civil society. Substantive democracy begins with the elements of procedural democracy, "but focuses additionally and explicitly on the capacity of citizens to hold authorities to account between elections, and tends to emphasise an informed, engaged citizenry able to engage in public debate and create public opinion that governments feel bound to heed. Such a substantive notion of democracy inevitably presupposes a citizenry that is informed, is able to debate ideas in public and able to communicate those ideas in ways that shape public opinion and ultimately policy."


As stated here, the role of media in a "vibrant public sphere" is to "inform publics of the issues that shape their lives, provide spaces for informed and inclusive public debate, and provide an outlet for the voices and perspectives of citizens, including marginalised ones". Ownership and control of media and who is served by media (both given voice, legitimacy, and audience status) influences the nature of a democracy. Professor Mary Kaldor is quoted here as saying: “The more bottom up the approach, the more the emphasis is on dialogue and communication, the more favorable the terms and the greater the possibility for substantive democracy.”

Deane argues that much of development assistance focuses on creating procedural democracy. He cites three pillars that support development consensus for focusing on substantive democracy: 1) development strategies “owned” by the societies implementing them; 2) “accountability,” the notion that governments should be principally held to account by their citizens rather than to donor governments; 3) the Millennium Declaration and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) articulated as the work of development. These pillars imply the existence of a knowledgeable and effective public sphere, informed by the media. This notion of development committed to substantive democracy requires that the media provide a forum for public debate and give voice to those otherwise marginalised, so that there is a notion that "publics" having a degree of ownership of public policy and that citizens can hold governments to account for their management of funds allocated for development, particularly as articulated by the MDGs and their objectives.

Deane states that while much progress has been made toward the objectives of the MDGs, "[a] growing focus within development agencies on governance is a recognition that much more work needs to be done on development as a political process." Herein lies the need for an increasing focus on substantive, rather than simply procedural, democracy and the role of media in making politics work for the [economically] poor. Deane then focuses on two conceptualisations of media: free media and plural media. Free media implies an increase in the number of media actors, a more complex media market, widening consumption of media, and a decrease in attacks on journalists. However, media free of government control can still have limited ownership and audience and access for the marginalised. Plural media focuses on increasing all of these.


Deane cites two factors for a recent decrease in the pluralisation of media, after decades of increasing pluralisation. One is increased risk to journalists, and the other is more acute competitive pressures, both economic and political, including ownership by people with special interests. Therefore, he argues for more attention to, and research on, notions of empowerment and participation in the media - particularly looking into ownership and accountability - "which suggests a far more intensive interest in the role of media and communication in development." He argues for more budget allocation and more expertise focused on the role of media and communication in development within development agencies.