May 2008

It often seems to me that in international development today a bifurcated reality exists when it comes to the potential or actual role of the news media in the governance agenda. For instance, in the great bilateral and multilateral agencies, many officials will, if asked, tell you that there is no doubt that the news media are a fundamental part of the architecture of good governance in their own countries. There is in these countries a tradition of thinking about the media as – collectively – the fourth estate of the realm, as co-participants in governance. But ask these same officials what role the news media can play, if supported and developed, in securing improved governance outcomes in developing countries and, suddenly, the conversation gets complicated. Why? Lots of reasons.

For a few years now, I have been developing a theory of media reform in post-conflict environments. It is a reading of the facts, nothing grand. I want to trot it out and see how you react to it. My sense is that when a developing country succumbs to conflict and finds the will to come out of it, or the combatants are simply too exhausted to continue the quarrel, donors rush in to help put Humpty Dumpty back together again. One of the things donors sometimes do is re-build the media system.

In the wake of the massive and horrific natural disasters in Myanmar and China, it is important to examine how the provision of humanitarian relief relates to issues of voice and accountability. In a general sense, communication should be an absolutely vital element of any relief effort. Broadcasting or otherwise circulating crucial information about unsafe areas, survivor resources, and important health and public safety issues can help prevent further outbreaks of disease and post-disaster traumas. Apart from providing humanitarian information, an independent media sector (in tandem with civil society) can ensure that rebuilding efforts are consultative, transparent and accountable.