Media and Communication in Governance: It's Time for a Rethink

This book chapter provides: a framework for thinking through the different development outcomes media support might achieve; arguments for why successful governance strategies are likely to involve a stronger media support focus in future; the challenges development actors have in prioritising effective support to media; and some suggestions of how support to media can be better integrated into governance-focused development strategies.

Regarding debate around the role of media in governance and media effectiveness in improved governance outcomes, Deane favours confronting the contestation so that media can be properly integrated into governance strategies. He argues that "governance strategies need to reassess their approach to the role of media and broader communication trends and assess more clearly their impact on governance outcomes."

The development system in its current iteration is described as consensus based, requiring "broad agreement from diverse political cultures". As a system, it does not "provide an effective platform from which to devise meaningful strategic action on an issue as politically charged, and  apparently  divisive,  as  integrating  support  for  free  media  into  development  strategies." However, the chapter argues for media integration into development strategies and states that attention focused on support for free media and governance issues "is likely to be cost effective."

Deane cites the following four reasons that development actors invest in media support - reasons that result in some "siloed thinking that prevents joined-up strategic programming across governance spheres":

1. "To build an independent media sector as an intrinsic good in and of itself, essential to the functioning of a democratic society and a key platform  for  freedom  of  expression  (democratic  and  human  rights  objectives).
2. To enhance the accountability of governments to citizens, often in order to improve service delivery and state responsiveness, improve state-citizen relations, support more informed democratic/electoral decision-making, or shift social norms to decrease public tolerance of corruption or poor governance (accountability objectives).
3. To improve debate, dialogue and tolerance especially in fragile or conflicted societies, increase the availability of balanced, reliable and trustworthy information, reduce the likelihood of hate speech or inflammatory media likely to exacerbate conflict, enhance social cohesion or build the legitimacy of weak governments in fragile contexts (conflict and stability objectives).
4. To   create   demand   for   services   (such   as   health   or   agricultural   services) and use the media as an instrument to achieve development objectives including  working  to  shift  behaviours  (e.g. improving  uptake  of  immunisation)  or  changing  the  social  norms  that  prevent  such  uptake,  such  as  distrust of vaccinations. (Communication for development objectives)."

The chapter argues that "political and governance outcomes simply can’t be understood or improved without engaging with the transformative shifts (both positive and negative) of 21st century media and information dynamics." It contrasts the institutional (more traditional) lens on the role of media in governance (for example, freedom of the press as a reducer of corruption and insurer of social accountability mechanisms) with a societal lens (for example, Arab Spring social media usage by economically and politically marginalised youth to contest government’s monopoly on information.) Increased societal access to new forms of media leads to questions of reliability and trust, questions that governance actors should not ignore.

Problems arising in engaging media and governance include: political aspects of imposing conditions on development assistance; architectural aspects of "country ownership of development support strategies"; the creation of an evidence base for support for media's role in governance; and the funding of research for that evidence base.

Deane states that issues of media and communication should feature much more substantially in future governance debates: "governance debates need to engage, embrace and respond to these [21st century] changes [in people's access to information] or risk becoming increasingly detached from how governance outcomes are increasingly being shaped, particularly at societal level." He suggests: 

• "Navigating difference...
• Acknowledging the problems of a normative approach...
• Working ‘with the grain’ has its limits... [implying a balance of working with dissent and with the reigning powers]
• History has its limits... [implying that changes in 'new' and social media are realigning how people receive information]
• The need for evidence and analysis...
• Bringing together media and new technologies...
• A clarity of focus and a governance forum...
• The media needs support..."