Theorising media-democracy
in African conditions
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
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.
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”.
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.
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.
Other paradigms
• Civil society – also diff 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
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?
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)
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?
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.
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
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!
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
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?
Civil Society- complications 5
• I. Reductionism:
– Conflating CS with demands for change? What
about demands against change?
– 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
• End of part 1
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).
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.
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.
---------------------------------------------------------
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.
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.
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.
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 noncooperation, lobbying, corruption … but democracy gives
weight to discussion and debate in the PS)
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)
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.
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.
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?).
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?
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.
Women, the poor, minorities?
State
Summing up:
Govt
The
Marginalised
Society at large
Public
sphere
Civil society
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.
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.
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
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.
Retracing ground covered:
• We have gone into:
– Methodological issues
– CS and PS concepts
– Synthesis model advanced
– Limitations noted
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?.