Supporting Journalism in Conflict Societies

This Media Conflict and DEMocratisation (MeCoDEM) policy brief puts forward suggestions for improved journalism support in the context of democratisation conflicts. It emerged from a research programme comparing and contrasting different types of democratisation conflicts across 4 countries: Egypt, Kenya, Serbia, and South Africa. (See Related Summaries, below.) MeCoDEM researchers investigated several types of conflicts linked to democratisation, or the demand for democratic change, in each of these countries: conflicts over the distribution and control of power; conflicts over different notions of citizenship; election campaigns that revive and reshape existing social divisions and conflicts; and struggles over the authoritarian past and over transitional justice. This brief focuses on journalists as one of the main communication actors in a conflict. With their agenda-setting power and their ability to create interpretive frames, journalists reporting on democratisation conflicts are key players in transitional contestations. Coverage contributing to a non-violent course of conflict and a constructive outcome relies on certain contextual conditions. The brief identifies specific conditions in need of improvement from journalists' perspective and considers ways to foster progress.

MeCoDEM researchers conducted 100 qualitative semi-structured interviews with journalists working in a broad range of different news media in each of the 4 countries and who covered the particular conflict cases under study. In brief, the 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). In summary, journalists feel they need support in the following areas:

• Institutional, professional, and psychological support after experiencing trauma as a result of witnessing violence;
• Safety equipment and agreed-upon organisational safety policies;
• Advanced training in conflict reporting, especially when it comes to ethical dilemmas;
• Opportunities to exchange expertise and know-how between different generations of journalists within the newsroom;
• Legal protection and support in view of many of the interferences to which they are subjected; and
• Alternatives to existing media business models in light of the fact that, in many contexts, increased economic and political pressure hinders journalists in their work.

The researchers also carried out 19 interviews with implementers and donors from the media development sector. The sample consists of members of European media development organisations who operate on an international level and local actors from the 4 case study countries. Media development organisations regard polarisation and a lack of ethical standards as the main problems in conflict societies. 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). The media development sector's critical self-reflection boils down to 3 main points:

1. There is a need for increased exchange within the sector in order to facilitate coordination and create opportunities for cooperation.
2. Media development needs to be granted higher priority on foreign policy agendas in recognition of the media's general value to a democratic society. Currently, the media development sector is struggling to be seen as making a serious contribution to human rights.
3. It is crucial to understand local conditions as a starting point of any support activity in order to reduce the risk of causing damage (for example, when participation in media development projects puts journalists in danger) and to ensure sustainability.

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:

• Consider the safety of journalists.
• Take local conditions as a starting point for addressing professional standards and ethical dilemmas.
• Intensify research and evaluation activities that take into account both journalism's place in specific political and economic contexts and how the audience responds to journalistic content - let these inform project design.
• Involve multiple stakeholders and facilitate exchange: Journalists benefit indirectly from improved communication capacity of their sources (such as government officials or political activists) and media literacy and empowerment of their audience (such as marginalised groups or minorities).
• Prioritise long-term formats such as mentoring, as well as professional support and advice that take into account the specific challenges and needs of journalists and the context of the specific newsroom structure in which they work.
• Make allowance for flexible budgets in media development projects.
• Establish learning and exchange mechanisms between the various organisations that are active on the ground - for example, under the umbrella of the Global Forum for Media and Development.
• Apply a qualitative approach for evaluating media development projects.