ijcd jan - march 2012

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012

1/66

ISSN - 2231 - 2498 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- January - March - 2012

www.communicationijcd.com -------------------------------- International Journal of Communication Development 1

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012

2/66www.communicationijcd.com -------------------------------- International Journal of Communication Development

ISSN - 2231 - 2498 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- January - March - 2012

2

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012

3/66



INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION DEVELOPMENT

ADVISORY BOARD - InternationalDr. Vikrant Kishore

Deptt. Of Filmmaking & Film StudiesDeakin University, Australia

Dr. Simon Wilmot

Course Co-ordinator, Masters of Film and Video, School ofCommunication and Creative Arts, Faculty of Arts

Deakin University, AustraliaAbdulmonam Al-Hasani (Ph.D.)

Deptt. of Mass CommunicationSultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman

Dr. Pushpita AwasthiZUID SCHARWOUDE, The Netherland

ADVISORY BOARD - NationalDr. Anup Singh Beniwal

Prof. & Dean USHSS & USMCGuru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi

Prof. B R Gupta

Former, HOD. Deptt. of Journalism Banaras Hindu UniversityVaranasi

Prof. C P Singh

USMC Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, DelhiProf. G P Pandey

Director Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India New DelhiProf. Keval J. Kumar

Former Prof. & Director, University of Pune &Symbiosis Institute of Journalism

Prof. K V Nagaraj

Dean University School of Mas CommunicationAssam Central University Silchar

Prof. Manoj Dayal

Dean & Head Dept. of JournalismGuru Jambeshwar University, Hisar.

Dr. Manoj K. Patairiya

Director, (NCSTC) Ministry of Science & Tech. GOI, Delhi.

Prof. Om Prakash SinghDean Mass communication,Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidya Peeth,Varanasi.

Prof. Pradeep Mathur

Former Course Director Journalism, IIMC, Delhi.Prof. Radheshyam Sharma

Founder VC, Makhanlal Chaturvedi Rashtriya PatrakaritaVishwavidyalaya, Bhopal.Prof. Sanjeev Bhanawat

Prof. and Head Deptt. of JournalismUniversity of Rajasthan, Jaipur

Prof. S P Gupta

Director School of Education, UPRTOU, AllahabadProf. Dr. Tapti Basu

HOD Deptt. of Journalism & Mass CommunicationUniversity of Calcutta, Kolkata

PANEL OF REFEREES:Prof. A K Mishra

HOD Deptt. Of Management Studies,Mizoram Central University, Aizwal

Dr. Anjani Kumar Mishra

Assistant Prof. Deptt. of Education,VBS, Purvanchal University, JaunpurDr. B Shailashree

Deptt. of Journalism Bangalore University, BangaloreDr. Dheeraj Shukla

Institue of Management Studies, Dehradun.Dr. Dharmesh Dhawankar

Deptt. of Mass Communication Nagpur University, NagpurDr. D. M. Shinde

Director Center for Media Studies SRTM University, Nanded.Dr. Ganesh Sethi

Deptt. of JMC Manipur Central University, Imphal.Dr. Govind ji Pandey

HOD Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar Central UniversityLucknow.

Dr. Mohd. FariyadMaulana Azad National University, Hyderabad.

Dr. Mridula Mishra(Associate Prof. Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Avadh University

Faizabad U.P.Dr. Shikha Rai

Course Coordinator, MA(JMC) IGNOU, Delhi.Mr. Sanjay Vishnu Tambat

Head Deptt. of JMC University Pune.Dr. Sudheer Shukla

Associate Prof. Commerce & Management

Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidya Peeth. Varanasi.Dr. Uma Shankar Pandey

Faculty Dept. JMC, University of Calcutta.Dr. Upendra

Head Editorial HR Jagran Prakashan Ltd. Noida

PATRON

Mr. S K Swami

Former Joint Secretary,Government of India.Prof. R S Tripathi

Former Professor Deptt. of Sociology,Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidya Peeth, Varanasi.

Prof. B. Hanumaiah

Vice-Chancellor, Babasaheb Bhimrao AmbedkarCentral University, Lucknow.

Prof Naresh Chandra Gautam

Former Vice ChancellorVBS Purvanchal University, Jaunpur UP.

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012



2

FROM THE EDITORS DESK

This edition of the IJCD addresses an aspect of communication development-communicationfor social good and development for human well-being.

For people working in research and development, participatory development communicationconcepts help in the use of effective two-way communication approaches, and methodology toplan, develop and evaluate communication strategies to address many questions.

How can researchers and practitioners improve communication with local communities andother stakeholders? How can two-way communication enhance community participation in re-search and development initiatives and improve the capacity of communities to participate inthe management of their natural resources? How can researchers, community members anddevelopment practitioners improve their ability to effectively reach policy makers and promote

change?

Participatory action research or action research involves utilizing a systematic cyclical methodof planning, taking action, observing, evaluating (including self-evaluation) and critical reec-tion prior to planning the next cycle. It is being observed that this form of research is taking a

back seat and researchers want to feel content with content analysis. Our journal encouragesparticipatory research and statistical representation. Communication development needs to beactively researched and brought out before the world. It should be able to propagate a changein society for the better.

Dr. Durgesh TripathiEditor

EDITOR

Dr. Durgesh Tripathi

USMC Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi.

EDITORIAL BOARD

Mr. Sachin Bharti

(Asstt. Prof.) GGS IP University Delhi

Ms. Kavita Koli(Producer Radio) GGS IP University Delhi

Mr. Deepak Sharma,GGS IP University DelhiMr. Ramesh Kr. Sharma

(Asstt. Prof.) MBICEM DelhiDr. Umesh C. Pathak

(Asstt. Prof.) MAIMS DelhiDr. AK Mishra

Shri MD Shah Womens College, MumbaiMr. Tapan Kapri

HOD Dept. of IT IME College Ghaziabad

CONSULTING EDITORS

Mr. A D Lamba

Assistant Registrar, GGS IPU, DelhiMs. Sangeeta Saxena

Chief of Bureau, India Strategic Magazine, Delhi

CORPORATE RELATIONS

Mr. Nalini Ranjan(PRO) GGS IP UnversityMr. Kamal Jit Dhiman

GGS IP UniversityMr. Dhyanendra Mani Tripathi

National S.M. (Orica Mining Services) India

LEGAL ADVISOR

Mr. Kailash Bharti

Advocate, Supreme Court, India.

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012

5/66



Civil SocietyThere are myriad denitions of civil society in the

post-modern sense. The London School of EconomicsCentre for Civil Societys working denition is illus-trative: Civil society refers to the arena of un-coercedcollective action around shared interests, purposes andvalues. In theory, its institutional forms are distinctfrom those of the state, and market, though in practice,the boundaries between state, civil society, and marketare often complex, blurred and negotiated. Civil soci-ety commonly embraces a diversity of spaces, actorsand institutional forms, varying in their degree of for-mality, autonomy and power. Civil societies are oftenpopulated by organizations such as registered charities,

development non-governmental organizations, com-munity groups, womens organizations, faith-basedorganizations, professional associations, trade unions,self-help groups, social movements, business associa-tions, coalitions and advocacy groups.

Whatever you call it civil society, third sector, NGOs,social enterprises it is the glue in society, a bastionof universal rights and pluralism, a source of citizensengagement, sustainable development and social inno-vation across borders and boundaries.

Civil society organisations play a vital role in the devel-opment of a country. They contribute to policy shapingby the government by providing input at an early stageof the policy-making process. Civil society organisa-tions also play the role of watchdog, holding publicauthorities accountable for delivering policies. Theyhelp to raise awareness on issues concerning develop-ment of the society like health, education, livelihood,etc. They also counterbalance the demand made by the

market on the society and environment.

As far as the institutional approach, the UN has a longhistory of relation with non-state actors ( Siochr,2002) that dates back to article 71 of its funding Char-ter. Rules to regulate interaction with civil society ac-tors were afterwards adopted by ECOSOC in 1950(Res. 288B) and 1968 (Res. 1296), and redened in

1996 (Res. 31). The mid-1990s was the time

of the growing visibility of NGOs and their growingpresence at UN conferences that started with Rio in1992, and proceeded to Vienna (1993), Cairo (1994)and Beijing (1995). During the Rio conference a rst

attempt to dene the boundaries of the complex reality

of civil society was carried on through the identi-cation of major groups, including gender, indigenouspeople, professionals, Research Objectives:The broad objective of the study was to nd out the

fairness of the leading newspapers of Delhi in coveringthe proceedings of Delhi Legislative Assembly.Specic objectives of the study were

i. To nd out the coverage of Delhi legislative assem-bly in the Delhi newspapers.

ii. To make a qualitative analysis of the news of theproceedings of Delhi legislative Assembly covered inthe Delhi Newspapersiii. To nd out the perception of the press people re-garding the adequacy of the facilities for the presspeople in the Legislative Assembly.iv. To study the perception of the press people regard-ing the coverage of the Legislative Assembly in theDelhi Newspapers.v. To know the perception of the press people regard-ing the proceedings of Delhi Legislative assembly.

vi. To nd out the perception of the MLAs regardingthe coverage of the Delhi Legislative Assembly in thenewspapers of Delhi.

NGOs; while the Commission on Global Governancewas also considering such developments in its investi-gation and proposals. In 1998 UN Res. 53/170, speak-ing about civil society organizations, stated that theycould no longer be seen only as disseminators of in-formation, but as shapers of policy and indispensable

bridges between the general public and intergovern-mental processes ... This path, together with a growingawareness of the need for a democratization of the UNsystem through a more open and participatory func-tioning, led to the recent work of the above-mentionedHigh Level Panel on UNcivil society relations, and itsnal output: We, the People: Civil Society, the United

Nations and Global Governance (June 2004).

Civil Society and Media in the process of DevelopmentDr. Mrinal Chatterjee (Professor)

Indian Institute of Mass CommunicationSanchar Marg, Dhenkanal, Orissa, India

1 What is civil society? Centre for Civil Society, Philippine Normal University. 2004-03-01. Retrieved 2006-10-30.

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012



4

This institutional approach to civil society landed atWSIS through Resolution 56/183, which encouragedintergovernmental organization, non-governmentalorganizations, civil society and the private sector tocontribute to, and actively participate in, the inter-governmental preparatory process of the Summit andthe Summit itself. Throughout the WSIS process theformula adopted was NGOs and civil society, thus

differentiating between the two and recognizing thatcivil society is something different (and, as the processdemonstrated, less dened) than NGOs.

Media and CommunicationMedia facilitates communication. Communication, atits basic level, is the activity of conveying meaning-ful information. It is a process by which meaning isassigned and conveyed in an attempt to create sharedunderstanding.

As communication enables collaboration and coop-eration, it can be a vital tool to strengthen democracy,increase the respect for human rights and assure trans-parency in implementation. By letting more peopleparticipate and strengthening the communication be-tween all stakeholders the development process canbe improved. However, despite the fact that a plannedcommunication process is accepted as a key factor forsuccess in many elds of the society, communication is

still seldom applied as a strategic tool for goal fulll-

ment in development cooperation. There are two simplereasons for this: one, as communication is a tool, oneneeds to know how to handle and use the tool; and two:communication to be effective requires more than ef-cient handling; it requires credibility and of the mes-sage as well as the sender. Several other factors relatedto the sender, the receiver, the message content and themedium through which the message is being dissemi-nated impact the efcacy of communication .

Development

Answer to the simple question, what is developmentcan differ from country to country, for it has subjec-

tive, formative and cultural dimensions. Taking theseinto considerations- attempts have been made to havea universally acceptable denition. Attempts have also

been made to quantify concepts like development andpoverty. Development can be measured in terms ofGDP, calorie intake, per capita spending, per capita en-ergy consumption, etc. But any quantitative measureone applies will have its detractors and critics. Henceit is prudent to dene development with the help ofyet another set of concepts: personal and social well-being, fulllment of basic necessities like food, shelter

education, health services, communication facilities; asense of security, peace, freedom of expression, free-dom of choice, etc.It will be pertinent to look at the UN denition of de-velopment, which reads: Development is a compre-hensive, economic, social, cultural and political pro-cess which aims at the constant improvement of the

wellbeing of the entire population and of all individu-als on the basis of their active, free and meaningful par-ticipation in development and in the fair distribution ofbenets resulting there from.

The link

Communication and/or media (often these two termsare used interchangeably) is crucial in development whether in the form of dissemination, guidelinesprescriptions, recommendations, advocacy, promo-tion, persuasion, education, conversation, roundtables

consultations, dialogue, counseling or entertainmentSometimes, providing information is the most power-ful strategy available. Information is a tool that helpspeople help themselves, in a shing-pole-rather-than-

sh sort of way. Information is also the lever that

people need to hold government accountable and toensure transparency in participative and empoweringprocesses. As one development communicator has putit They say sunlight is the best disinfectant, well letthe sunlight in!But communication is often about more than provid-ing information. It is about fostering social awarenessand facilitating public democratic dialogue. It is about

2CLAUDIA PADOVANI & ARJUNA TUZZI, Communication Governance and theRole of Civil Society: Reections on Participation and the Changing Scope of Political Action, Towards a

Sustainable Information Society3A list of such factors may include:Sender: Credibility, Attitude,Message: Credibility, Comprehensibility, applicability, Tone and tenorReceiver: Cognitive level, AttitudeMedium: Accessibility, Perceptibility,Other factors: Cultural homogeneity, Past experience

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012

7/66



contributing to evidence-based policy, and about build-ing a shared understanding which can lead to socialchange. It is about creating space for the voices of thepoor to be heard, and, ultimately, it is about redistribut-ing power.

As civil society has been doing it through media(if you take media in the larger umbrella of civil so-

ciety), it has gained credibility over the years. Peoplebelieve in what is being told and written and shown onmedia. They form their perception and then opinion onthe basis of information, analysis and suggestion givenby the media. It does not happen always, as a numberof communication theories have pointed out . But itcertainly happens often enough to have vested enor-mous power on media. Countless number of commu-nication theories have established the fact that mediacan and do inuence human thought and behaviour .

From fashion to stardom to creating positive attitudefor certain issues- media can inuence, and therein lieits power.

The Pitfalls

However, these positive effects of communication donot come automatically. More communication doesnot automatically mean more development. More com-munication can simply end up as a form of pushingknowledge down a hosepipe, in the hope that at leastsome of it will come out the other end. In fact, in cer-

tain situations, disempowering or esoteric communica-tion dynamics can dramatically hinder development.

This is why it is important to communicate better. Thatrequires the knowledge about some basic questionslike: whom to communicate with, why to communicateand how to do that.

How to communicate better?This requires clear understanding of several questions.

The two basic questions are: communication with

whom and why? Civil society is required to commu-nicate in two different semantic spaces: that of inter-nal dynamics within the civil society sector and thatof interaction with the ofcial process. A clear under-standing of the recipients prole, their communica-tions need (both felt and latent), their cognitive leveand capacity to retain and act upon communication, etcis required.

The other question that needs an answer is: why com-municate? Answer to this question will throw lighton the purpose of the communication. Communica-tion content and delivery platform should conrm to

achieve the purpose of communication.

Mode of CommunicationTraditional one-way communication, or disseminationhas long been considered enough to reach objectives in

development cooperation. It assumes that the receiv-ers the citizens take the information and transformit into action. However, proof has shown that the dis-semination method is neither sufcient nor efcient

To be credible communication must take into accountthe focus on participation and transparency. With par-ticipatory approaches, projects, programmes and sec-tor support will belong to those they are set to benet

assuring real ownership.

Modern communication theories rely on building rela-

tions, in other words creating a dialogue between thosepreviously seen as senders and receivers. Howeverexact mode of communication depends on the require-ment and ground condition.

Caveat

There are several factors, which impact efcacy of com-munication. Credibility of content, sender and mediumare important for the reception of communication bythe intended recipients. Public trust is lost when theyare imagined and approached in ways that ignores anddevalues their everyday experiences. Distrust happens

4 Rick Davies (www.mande.co.uk).5Theory of Incidental Effects says media has limited effects on its audience. According to this theory media effects are limited tocopying of style, mannerism. etc., Reinforcement Theory stated that mass media has limited effects on its audience. It merely rein-forces existing values and attitudes.6Agenda Setting Theory says that media can and often do set agenda for the society to follow. Catharsis and Narcosis Theory has itthat exposure to mass media particularly A/V media engrosses the audience attention to the extent that it prevents them from takingany logical decisions. According to Cultivation Theory media, especially A/V media tend to induce audiences to adopt perception andvalues which were constantly portrayed in different programmes. 7Barnett, Andrew (4 April 2005) Reducing poverty needs an innovation system approach, SciDev.Net, available atwww.scidev.net/dossiers/index.cfm?fuseaction=dossierReadItem&type=3&itemid=374&language=1&dossier=13.

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012



6

when communication fails to address the world as thepublic recognize it, leaving them feeling like outsiderslooking on at a drama that even the leading performersdo not care if they really comprehend. Reuters Institutefor the study of Journalism did an interesting construc-tivist study of social life of news. The study highlight-ed the need for public trust for news. The ndings are

relevant for communication by civil society too.

Free access to information is another important fac-tor to accord credibility to the information, and ensuretransparency which is a signicant factor in the process

of development. Freedom of speech and expression in-cluding freedom to disseminate information is also re-quired. Fortunately we have that in India, enshrined inthe constitution and jealously guarded by the judiciaryand civil society. Market at times has its own agenda re-lated to development. There could be a conict here, in

which case both civil society and market forces wouldlike to use communication to inuence the public. Incases like these, credibility of content and sender playa vital role in inuencing the public.

ConclusionThe public sphere is the space of communication ofideas and projects that emerge from society and areaddressed to the decision makers in the institutions ofsociety. The civil society is the organized expressionof the values and interests of society. The relationships

between government and civil society and their inter-action via the public sphere dene the polity of society.

Media plays a very important role in synergizing thelarge public sphere in the development process. How-ever, much depends upon the credibility and usefulnessof the content of communication for the public and theskill of using communication to an end.

8Public Trust in the News, Reuters Institute for the study ofJournalism, Department of Politics and International Relations,

University of Oxford, 2009

Further Resources:Books:

Hovland Ingie, Successful Communication: A Toolkitfor Researchers and Civil Society Organisations, Re-search and Policy in Development Programme, 111Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7JD, 2005Civil Society Media and Global Governance - Inter-vening into the World Summit on the Information So-ciety, by Arne Hintz, 2009

Communication Development and Civil Society : Es-says on Social Development and Civil Society byV.S. Gupta, 2004Globalization, communication and transnational civisociety by Sandra Braman, Annabelle Sreberny in1996The politics of civil society: neoliberalism or socialleft? By Frederick W. Powell in 2007

Articles:

http://p2pfoundation.net/Engaging_Critically_with_the_Reality_and_Concept_of_Civil_Societyhttp://www.odi.org.uk/resources/download/155.pdfhttp://articles.timesondia.indiatimes.com/keyword/

civil-societyhttp://iamcr.org/members-books-newsmenu-325/545civil-society-mediah t t p : / / w w w . i n t e l l e c t b o o k s . c o . u k

le:download,id=745/Chapter%202.pdfhttp://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/india/The-rise-of-civil-society/Article1-683329.aspxhttp://www.hindustantimes.com/Search/searchaspx?q=Civil%20Society

Websites:

h t t p : / / e p r i n t s . l s e . a c . u k / g c sh t m l ? c x = 0 0 2 1 4 4 9 7 7 5 1 0 4 9 4 5 0 0 3 1 7 : _n5qeshhmvy&cof=FORID:10&ie=UTF-8&q=%22C

vil+Society+Working+Paper%22&sa=Search

http://www.undp.org/oslocentre/overview/civil_society_communication.htmlhttp://www.waccglobal.org/en/19963-alternativecommunication-networks/963-Globalisation-Civil-So-ciety-and-Communication.htmlhttp://www.un.org/en/civilsociety/http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/employment_and_social_policy/antidiscrimination_relations_with_civil_society/c10717_en.htmhttp://www.civilsocietyonline.com/

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012

9/66



Abstract :Journalism is Fourth Pillar of Strongest Democratic countrylike India. Mass Communication and Journalism Educationgives good reporters and media persons for this pillar, as

well as Mass Communication and Journalism Education as-sumes new signicance in the developing country like In-dia. After being neglected for a long time, journalism andmass communication courses in India are witnessing a lotof demand from students intent on pursuing careers in jour-nalism and communication. While the boom in private tele-vision channels in the country fuels this demand, it is notunit form across all institutions and the reasons are many.What used to be a postgraduate degree specialization is nowalso being offered in many institutions as an undergraduatespecialization. In addition, there are also

other questions about the level of courses and how they tieinto each other, the kinds and consistency of training of-fered, the course curriculum and duration and the overallquality of the education. While there are a number of otherconcerns about journalism education in India, Print Mediais faithful resource in India. For the both of media , Journal-ism colleges are providing human resources. It is importantthat we have to see whether the study of this important fac-ulty is going on correct way or not.

Present State of Journalism Education:Journalism education formally began rst. In 1938 Aligarh

Muslim University started a Diploma in Journalism, whichwas discontinued after two years. In 1942, the Department ofJournalism of Punjab University, Lahore (now in Pakistan)marked the beginning of communication/media educationin pre-independent India. This increased in the 1960s whenvarious traditional universities opened either journalism orcommunication programme`s. Madras University started acourse in Journalism in 1947. Calcutta University started aJournalism course in 1950.

Journalism education in India is offered at different levelsand in over a few hundred public and private institutions inIndia. There are different nomenclatures used for the de-grees and a number of terms are used synonymously. It isnot uncommon to use Journalism, Communication, MassCommunication, and Media individually or in a combina-tion when referring to the degree emphasis. Traditionally,journalism courses have been a postgraduate offering avail-able for students after their regular (10+2+3) Bachelorof Arts, Science or Commerce degrees, but even though itis a postgraduate. degree it is still termed as a Bachelors inCommunication and Journalism (BCJ) or a Bachelors inScience (Journalism /or Communication) or a Bachelors in

Journalism and Mass Communication (BJMC) and a Mas-ters in Communication and Journalism (MCJ) or a Masterof Arts (Journalism/Communication) degrees. In additionthere are a number of postgraduate diplomas and certicate

courses offered by private institutions. In some institutionsnow a days they are offering new course of journalism after10+2 standard it is called 3 years integrated course A numberof media houses also train some of their own journalists byselecting potential students with necessary skills and puttingthem through journalism training workshops and on-the-jobtraining intern programs. Such media houses believe that ibuilds employee loyalty and increases long-term employeeretention rates while also proving cost-efcient. The Times

Research Institute, and The Endu School of Journalism aretwo of the institutions that come to mind. Media Organi-

zations like NDTV, AAJ TAK, IBN LOKMAT, ZEE andothers also run on-the-job training programs. Some collegesand Universities are started the new subject of ElectronicMedia. All state institutions in India offer degree courses inJournalism and Communication and some have institutionthat offer journalism courses through distance educationcourses. Each state also has a number of private institutionthat offer degree and diploma courses. Some states alsohave federal institutions that offer these courses . With thedevelopment of globalization and Internet technology, me-dia development in India has entered a new period. Networkwhich spread quickly, timely and interactive gave birth to

citizen journalism, and social media or social networkingwhich led to the public involvement to improve journalismincrease quickly and made professional boundaries of ca-reer of journalists blur. Meanwhile, India is now facing asocial transition and all aspects of social life has undergonetremendous changes. New media environment, social environment on news media raised new challenges. Mass medianot only carry on the role of communication, but also takeunprecedented responsibility in playing the role of the so-cial supervisor to promote the development of India. In thenew media and social environment, the information trans-fer mode of the past has changed and journalism educationis also facing changes. The University Grants Commission(UGC), an apex institution for providing coordination anddissemination of standards in universities, colleges and re-search institutions came into being in 1956. By the 1970sinstitutions like the Indian Institute of Mass Communica-tion (IIMC), the National School of Drama (NSD), the Filmand Television Institute of India (FTII), and the National In-stitute of Design (NID), all under State leadership, contrib-uted directly or indirectly to the growth and human resourcerequirements of the media sector in India.

Journalism Education : Opportunities and Challenges

Dr. Deepak M ShindeHOD,School of Media Studies,

SRTMUniversity Nanded(Maharashtra)-43

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012



8

Indian universities, which started journalism as an academicdiscipline, are increasingly replacing it with communica-tion studies or mass communication in the last three de-cades. The challenge in the Indian context is also about themedium of instruction in these courses, especially in State-owned universities. That is the reason most universities of-fer journalism courses in vernacular languages. The onlynational institute of journalism, the Makhanlal ChaturvediRashtriya Patrakarita Vidyalaya (or Makhanlal ChaturvediNational University of Journalism) established in Bhopal in1990 came into existence via a Bill passed in the MadhyaPradesh state assembly. In the index of the Association of In-dian Universities Handbook, which lists 273 university levelinstitutions including 52 deemed universities, postgraduatedegrees in communication/media subjects are listed as Mas-ter of Arts (MA) in some universities and Master of Science(M Sc), Master in Communication Studies, Master of Jour-nalism and Mass Communication, Master of Journalism andMedia Science, in others. More than 20 institutions offerdegrees in communication/media, but the number of institu-

tions offering diploma programmes is much higher. Degreesare offered under various names: visual arts, lm studies,

mass communication, communication and journalism, de-velopment communication, mass communication and jour-nalism, communication studies, communication, broadcastjournalism, mass media, audio visual media, mass relations.Similar titles are given for undergraduate degree and postgraduate degrees.

Currently, the teacher structure, curriculum, teaching meth-ods, laboratory facilities, research mechanism of India jour-nalism education need to carry out comprehensive reforms

in order to meet the need of media integration. Too special-ized personnel training model has led to some shortcomingsin journalism education in India. In the past, the focus of itsvalue orientation is not to educate knowledge, ability andquality all-round development, but how to make an educa-tor only meet an occupation. Therefore, India`s In structureof university education courses, professional educationcourses predominate. Today, the value of journalism edu-cation has undergone a fundamental change in orientation,which begun to focus on practice and ability and encourageacademic research. Combination with the industry is pro-

ducing a variety of new modes of teaching and research.Journalism education need to break the traditional mode ofthinking, emphasis on individual education, promote gen-eral education, highlight outstanding vocational education,focus on training social responsibility and professionalismof the students, which are present and for a long period thevalue of education goals of Indias journalism education.

The paper focuses on issues of opportunities and chal-

lenges of Journalism Education in India, including:

1. The shift role of journalism in the new media environ-

ment and the special social context in India and the impor-tance of education reform.2. The function, values and objectives of journalism educa-tion, and factors restricting the development of journalismeducation issues,3. The problems of Indias journalism education and thereasons..4. In the context of globalization, how to change journal-ism education philosophy, values orientation, educationamodel, curriculum and other aspects to promote the development of countrys journalism education.5. Particular attention will be paid to the change of news

values, Media Ethics changes in the media concept andsocial responsibility in newly emerging social environmenin India .6. To search, Weather the ultimate purpose of Mass Communication training is to build a band of conscious, com-mitted, competitive, courageous and co mp as-sionate professionals and nation builders are solved or not.7. To Examine, The educational institutions were contrib-

uted champions of professionalism and public interest ornot.8. To examine, weather The media owners should look forward to recruiting such worthy graduates or not.Journalism education is popular amongst the Girls thanboys it is mainly because of the explosion of TV in India.However, there are no teachers and even less lab facilities. these courses are more popular with female studentsthan with male students but feels that there is an increasingneed to bring awareness about gender sensitivity amongstudents and faculty. there are other reasons also than justhe television media boom in the country, Journalism was

the last choice for students in the past but now has becomethe rst choice as a result of the media boom in the country

and of the rapid growth of not just IT technologies but theneed for human resource(s) with application skills, with acommand over the technology and good analytical and writ-ing skills in any language.By analyzing the issues above, the paper tries to get an ac-cess to reveal the relationship between social developmentand Journalism education in India.The ultimate purpose of Mass Communication training is tobuild a band of conscious, committed, competitive, coura-

geous and compassionate professionals and nation buildersMedia institutions must encourage well-qualied, trainedskilled and competent work force in order to enhance pro-fessional excellence, accountability and social responsibil-ity.

Challenges:

1 Journalism Teachers ware working with the thinking o21st century , work with the management of 20th centurywith facility of 19th century2. Mass Communication and Journalism teaching, training

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012

11/66



research and extension activities are not properly organizedon sound footing of resources and systematic management.3. Most of the universities have not updated the syllabi inaccordance with the changing media scenario.4. Adequate faculty members who are specialists in vari-ous aspects of Communication and Journalism are not re-cruited5. The faculty members are not given adequate opportuni-ties to develop higher specialization, skill and competence.In reality, fellowships, scholarships and other facilities arenot extended to the faculty members adequately in order toensure advanced studies, research and professional growth.6. Lack of trained teachers, infrastructural facilities and up-graded syllabi are the major hurdles in the way of soundMass Communication teaching.7. Most of the departments are not getting latest books andprofessional journals due to nancial constraints. They do

not have well equipped audio-visual lab, computer lab,photo lab, close circuit television, Internet facility,departmental library and allied facilities.

8. A major drawback of Mass Communication and Journal-ism education in India is the lack of locally relevanttextbooks, professional journals and advanced reading ma-terials.9. The students are not enabled to acquire practical skillsand operational competence on regular basis during theirstudy period10. Teachers, professionals and policy makers do not worktogether toward making Mass Communication and Jour-nalism education purposeful.

Suggestions or conclusion:

In the preceding sections I have highlighted some of themajor concerns about journalism education in India today.While there are a number of other issues thatneed to be addressed, these above mentioned major con-cerns need to be addressed urgently if there needs to besome relevance to what is being taught in the name of jour-nalism education in India.It is difcult to say what is right

with journalism education in India today. The major thingsI found in this study is Lack of Industry Collaboration, Lackof Consistent Course Curriculum, and Lack of Resourcesand Infrastructure in the Journalism Institutions. It is nec-

essary to point out that, the institutions and teachers mustknow that, journalists called upon to deal with a range ofissues that cover anything under the sun, students need tobe provided with a strong academic base to facilitate thisunderstanding.

The most important problem of journalism education ishow to adapt to the changing media environment and trainhigh-level news media journalists, Journalism educationshould implement open mode of education. Open modemeans openness both in teaching resources and teaching

approaches.

1. Journalism colleges should introduce senior media re-porters to enrich teaching staff and encourage a wide rangeof teaching courses.2. Mass Communication and Journalism education shouldbe planned as an integrated development programme takingit to account the present trends like globalization, liberal-ization and privatization.3. Standardization of Mass Communication and Journalismtraining should be ensured in order to make training in thissector absolutely result oriented.4. The Departments of Mass Communication and Journal-ism should be equipped with the state of art facilities andcompetent manpower.5. The course contents should be modied in order to keep

pace with changing needs of media industry6. The answer to these problems lies in the creation of astatutory body, on the lines of the All India Council of Technical Education or the All India Medical Council, to gov-

ern media education in India. Such a measure will not onlystandardize media education in the country but also mark abeginning towards becoming world class.

References:

1. Media Education, U.K Singh and K.N. Sudarshan, Discovery Publishing House, New Delhi, 19 96, ISBN- 81 -7141-36682. Mass Media and Methods of EducationA.Z.Bukhari,Anmol Publications Pvt., Ltd.New Delhi,ISBN-81-261-2556-X, 20063. Media and Learning , Shahzad Ahmed, Anmol Publica-

tions Pvt., Ltd.New Delhi, ISBN- 81-261- 2 5 6 2 - 420064. Media and World Education , Sita Ram Sharma, Sarup &Sons, New Delhi, ISBN-81-25431-728 III Volume.5. Modern Media and Educational Practice, Janardan Pras-ad, Kanishka Publishers, Distributors, New Delhi. ISBN81-7391-311-0, 1999.6. AIU (2009) Universities Handbook, Association of In-dian Universities, New Delhi, .7. Wikipedia8. Google, social networking .

9.Reform of dissemination of information and journalismeducation under the prospect of media integration ochange and reform news, Wen Cai, Media Today, 200910. Journalism education and textbooks in SAARC coun-tries. Eapen, K. E. (1991)

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012



10

1. IntroductionThis essay asserts the relevance of Jrgen Habermas

concept of a public sphere for political engagement viathe Internet. It contends that the Internets openness topopular participation affords greater democratic poten-tial than the traditional media in media-rich societies.Democratic participation on the Internet complementsand affects the operations of more formal politicalstructures, adapting to and creating new trends in po-litical engagement.

Section 2 notes the expanding scope of Habermas pub-lic sphere, and the pervasiveness of the network meta-

phor in his recent work. Habermas (1996) characterizesboth the public sphere and civil society as networks.Manuel Castells notion of a network society extendsHabermas scheme of communicative networks bymapping the latter on to electronic networks. Castellstheory is superimposed upon Habermas networkedpublic sphere and civil society, and this theoreticalcomplex is applied to new forms of networked politicalparticipation. Sections 3, 4 and 5 discuss three types ofnetworked politics online activism, protest move-ments launched on Facebook, and civic engagement.The examples in each section draw upon Habermasianand network theory to present certain key features ofthe public sphere, highlighting the latters relevance forcontemporary society.

Section 3 discusses the Zapatista movement and Se-attle protests to demonstrate the public spheres needfor a safe deliberative space, the exertion of inuence

upon the dominant sphere, the Net-enabled expansionof the public sphere and political agenda, the symbiosis

of public and private spheres as a source of empow-erment, and ideological diversity rather than absoluteconsensus as an index of stronger democracy. Section4 investigates Facebooks potential as a digital publicsphere, by closely examining the 2008 protest move-ment in Colombia against the guerrillas of the Revolu-tionary Armed Forces of Colombia. Section 5 examineshow civic culture and structured civic engagement sup-port and are promoted by the electronic public sphere.

The Minnesota E-Democracy is seen as a successfulinstance of a civic public sphere, while the case of Am-

sterdams Digital City illustrates the public spheresrefeudalization.Section 6 concludes that the relevance and usefulnessof Habermas public sphere becomes evident throughan evaluation of the Internet as a democratic space (al-beit with certain qualications). It observes, however

that further research needs to be conducted on the issueof power within Habermas networked public sphereRecognizing and theorizing the inequitable distributionof participatory power in the public sphere would makeHabermas concept more comprehensive and realistic.

2. Introduction: Habermas and Castells a

Theoretical ComplexHabermas original conception of a public sphere de-rived from a specic socio-historical context the

emergence of a group within the educated and proper-tied bourgeoisie of late eighteenth and early nineteenthcentury Europe, whose public discussions of contem-porary culture and politics were characterized by ra-tionalcritical argumentation. The critical quality of

discourse rather than personal status was the criterionof participation. But the ability to conduct rational ar-gumentation was a product of a high level of educationand participation was effectively restricted to the bour-geoisie (Habermas, 1989, pp. 2643). The contributionof the bourgeois public sphere to democratic politicswas tenuous at best.

More recently, Habermas has conceded the need to ad-mit from the very beginning the coexistence of com-peting public spheres and to take into account the dy-

namics of those processes of communication that areexcluded from the dominant public sphere (1992, p425). The recognition of multiple agents/centres of de-bate/opinion which are distinct from institutionalizeddeliberative forums has two key effects: (1) it signies

a shift away from an anachronistic participatory modelto one that is dynamic, exible and better suited to con-temporary democracy; (2) it implies a dichotomy andcreative tension between competing public spheres

Digital Networks and Democratic Possibilities

Habermas Public Sphere in Contemporary E-Societies

Mr. Anirban SarmaNational Programme Ofcer (Communication and Information Sector)

UNESCO Ofce in New Delhi

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012

13/66



and the dominant or refeudalized public sphere in-stitutionalized in the mass media.

These effects form the basis of Habermas reformula-tion of the public sphere as a network for communi-cating information and points of view [] the streamsof communication are in the process ltered and syn-thesized in such a way that they coalesce into topicallyspecied public opinions (1996, p. 360). The multi-directional network of communication and informa-tion exchange constitutes a new site of dialogue andsocial interaction (nested within but distinct from civilsociety) that detaches itself from the publics physi-cal presence and extend[s] to the virtual presence ofscattered readers, listeners or viewers (p. 361). Quiteevidently, for the later Habermas, locale ceases to cir-cumscribe the discursive space: there is far greateropenness to popular participation, the requirements

of democracy and the nature of large-scale social orga-nization (Calhoun, 1992, pp. 34).

The idea of a network informs not just Habermasnotion of a public sphere, but also its underlying so-cial structure. For Habermas, civil society mediatesbetween social issues in the private sphere and theirtransmission to the public sphere. Thus civil soci-ety, albeit a medium, is not unilinear but a networkof associations that institutionalizes problem-solvingdiscourses on questions of general interest inside the

framework of organized public spheres (p. 367). Sucha network is intrinsically egalitarian and underpins thedemocratic potential of the public sphere. In sum, thepublic sphere is a network that receives the issues uponwhich it deliberates from other networks of social andinformation exchange.

Habermas is concerned with the social and communi-cative capacity of networks. Manuel Castells appearsto root his notion of the network society (2004a)within the new Habermasian framework, but goes be-yond it by mapping the socialcommunicative aspectof networks on to the technicalinstrumental potentialof digital networks:

A network society is a society whose social structureis made of networks powered by micro-electronicsbased information and communication technologies.(2004a, p. 3)

Interestingly, the terms of Castells analytical frame-

work remain primarily social (though the technicalimplications are never far from the surface). Just asHabermas implied the reroutable character of networkscomprising the public sphere and civil society, Castellsnotes the reconguring capacity inscribed in the pro-cess of networking that enables the programs govern-ing every network to selectively re-orient themselvestowards or to seek out new entities that may be assimi-

lated into the network in order to enhance its value orperformance (2004a, p. 23).

Further, Castells assertion that the network society op-erates through a binary logic of inclusion/exclusionwhich may shift with changes in the networks pro-grams and with the conditions of performance of theseprograms (p. 23) recalls Habermas (1992) assertionthat the operation of coexisting and competing publicspheres is built upon a logic of inclusion within / ex-

clusion from the dominant public sphere; and Haber-mas (1996) characterization of civil society as a lter-ing mechanism for deciding if a subject is of sufcient

general interest to be included for / excluded fromdeliberation in the public sphere.

In a networked social system value is decided by thedominant social institutions (Castells, 2004a, p. 24)Castells posits a realignment of networks to accommo-date dominant values: a hierarchy is created amongnetworks on the basis of the transmission of values

to them, or their adherence to particular values. Thisreects Habermas distinction between the dominant

public sphere of the mass media and decentred, com-peting public spheres. But a critical difference is theagency Habermas seems willing to assign to the net-work of public spheres. Habermas silence about theinuence of the dominant public sphere on competing

spheres opens up a range of possibilities from activeresistance to alignment with dominant values.

The reconguration of the public sphere and the social

structure itself as a system of overlapping networks hasgiven rise to a new form of political engagement: Net-worked politics is individualized politics, which triesto connect to many other individuals, suddenly identi-ed as recognizable citizens (Sey and Castells, 2004

pp. 378). Contemporary democracies are marked bya perceptible increase in and shift to newer kinds ofextra-parliamentarian politics that emphasize singleissues rather than overarching platforms or ideologiesand are more closely related to peoples lives and indi-

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012



12

vidual identities. Engagement with lifestyle politicsarticulates and shapes selfhood in ways that traditionalpolitics cannot (Dahlgren, 2000a, pp. 31115; 2001b,pp. 424).

The Internets capacity to create multidirectional net-works that can expand endlessly makes it the platformof choice for individual citizens, grassroots organiza-

tions, and political entrepreneurs who come togetherin an autonomous programme to redesign the politi-cal process. Lacking any direct control mechanism,the network develops around certain goals specied

through deliberation within the network itself. Whilecontributing to the plurality of the public sphere, theInternet also strengthens or stabilizes it, as voluntaryparticipation in an interactive political network is anexpression of commitment toward a personal politicaloption. As the examples in the following sections on

networked activism and networked civic engage-ment demonstrate, the use of the Internet for delib-erative democracy conrms the dual orientation of

participants political engagement: while they directlyinuence the political system through their political

programmes, they also seek to expand / contribute tothe public sphere and civil society and conrm their

own identities and capacities to act (Habermas, 1996,p. 370).

3. Networked Activism

Three fundamental properties of digital networks de-centralized access / distributed outcomes, simultaneity,and interconnectivity facilitate the democratic mobi-lization of activist networks across geographies. Butthe power of these counterpublic spheres to negotiatewith the dominant public sphere varies. Online activ-ism may achieve the successful passage of oppositionalmessages from the seemingly remote spheres of micromedia [] to mass media (Bennett, 2001, np). Suchcrossovers constitute the dialogue that Habermas

deems necessary for reshaping the public sphere. Thesubsequent discussion of the Zapatista uprising and the1999 protests at Seattle against the WTO demonstratethe crossover of messages, the Internets potential as ademocratic space, its ability to nurture counterpublics,and to physically realize virtual activism.

The causes of the 1994 indigenous Zapatista rebellionin Chiapas, Mexico are well documented (Cleaver,1998, pp. 6237; Castells, 2004b, pp. 7582). While e-mobilization efforts initially sought to consolidate pop-

ular support for the Zapatista movement, and constructcollective outrage against the Mexican governmentsadherence to the NAFTAs neoliberalism, the Internetsoon began to be used in other innovative ways. On-line conferences and multilingual discussion forumsfacilitated active deliberation on the plight of Chiapasand democracy in Mexico. Post-1994, the Internet alsofunctioned as a feedback device for peoples response

to inter/national plebiscites. Over a million people inMexico participated in the plebiscites, and there werealso about 81,000 responses from foreigners from 47other countries (Cleaver, 1998, pp. 62830).

The Internet created a corpus of readily accessible andveriable information about the movement. Interna-tional observers ocked to Chiapas, and their depen-dence on the Internet for rsthand and breaking news

(with its implicit ideological bias) caused media mes-

sages to pass from the alternate to the mainstream massmedia, or from the counterpublic to the public sphereHabermas sees the tendency of counterpublics towardspublics as a creative tension, necessary for the expan-sion of democracy. Paradoxically, alternate validityclaims depend on the mass media for their validationand incorporation. As Rucht notes:

[] reactions of the mass media are a preconditionfor the ultimate success or failure of these movementsTherefore, from the local to the global levels, move-

ments struggle for public visibility as granted (or re-fused) by the mass media. (2004, p. 32)

Democratic deliberation requires a safe space wherediscourse counter to the dominant may be developed(Palczewski, 2001, p. 172). The Internet offers a rel-atively safe space for activists to deliberate and pro-duce potentially subversive discourses, as decentral-ized, leaderless and virtually anonymous [] broadlydistributed communication via electronic networkschallenges censorship even if it is closely monitored(Bennett, 2001, np). The safety of virtual space wascentral to the Zapatista movement, as mass support forthe cause could continue to be consolidated online (andby extension via the mainstream media) even when theMexican army forced the rebels to retreat into the hillsin 1996. The most striking use of the Internet, howeverhas been in linking autonomous movements at regionaand inter/national levels. Internet-enabled horizontalcollaboration between the Zapatistas have promotedunity through diversity, allowing localized struggles to

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012

15/66



articulate common objectives without compromisingtheir autonomy and specicity. The intercontinental

meetings organized in Chiapas (1996) and Spain (1997)drew thousands of grassroots activists, greatly enrich-ing democratic institution-building, and expanding thesphere of deliberative democracy. The mobilization ofoverlapping social movement[s] via decentralizedelectronic networks thus creates not a single unied

movement, but a powerful, exible, and far-reachinglibertarian network (Juris, 2004, pp. 3524).

The anti-globalization movement has effectively har-nessed the strategic potential of the Internet to engagewith non-state, transnational targets such as corpo-rations and trade regimes, and has demonstrated agrowing coordination of communication and actionacross networks (Bennett, 2003, p. 144). The Battleof Seattle that resulted in the closure of the WTO min-

isterial meeting (1999) in Seattle was a watershed inthe movement against free trade. The preceding year,the failure of the Multilateral Agreement on Investment(MAI) had largely been an outcome of the Internet-based campaign of a network of organizations fromabout 70 countries. Although the online protests weresupplemented by their ofine counterparts, the Internet

helped to cement the opposition that had begun simul-taneously in several developed countries (Van Aelstand Wargrave, 2004, p. 100). The anti-MAI movementmay be seen as a precursor to Seattle. Other than mass

protests, there were several reasons for the failure ofthe Seattle Ministerial the NorthSouth divide andUSEurope agricultural divide. But the popular pro-tests had by far the most powerful symbolic value, andwere granted further visibility through extensive mediacoverage (Juris, 2004, p. 343).

The Internet played a major democratizing role in mo-bilizing opinion and subsequently translating it into ac-tion. The Seattle protests were coordinated primarilythrough email, electronic bulletin boards, chat rooms,online forums, and mobile phones. This form of net-working generated physical mobilization on an unprec-edented scale mass demonstrations were coordinatedand executed simultaneously in over 80 cities spanningmany countries. Throughout 1999 the StopWTO distri-bution list provided detailed information on various as-pects of the WTO, relevant to the protests. Other sites particularly the umbrella website of the anti-WTOcoalition disseminated information, plans and sched-ules of protests / demonstrations. All deliberations

were conducted in the public domain, and participationin the campaign was open to all. The exibility and

regenerative capacity of electronic networks provedremarkably useful for the campaigns continuity: whenauthorities crippled the Direct Action Networks (anaction group) digital network, a new ad hoc mobilecommunications system could be re-assembled at shortnotice (Van Aelst and Wargrave, 2004, pp. 100102

Hatcher, 2003, pp. 978).

The WTO History Project (www.wtohistory.org) at theUniversity of Washington provides personal testimo-nies of and transcripts of interviews with several Se-attle activists. A considerable number of intervieweesmention the importance of personal digital media tosocial movements. All the interviewees draw attentionto the sheer plurality of voices within the movementand the advantages of horizontal collaboration between

multiple, widely dispersed groups and individuals. Thepersonal testimonies include accounts of evolving self-hood, and scepticism of the mass media. StephanieGuilloud, an activist, combines notions of private andpublic with the circulation of messages in the dominantpublic sphere:As we begin to un-learn the social idea that newspa-pers and televisions tell us the truth, we see that indi-vidual voices are equally as valid and important. Si-multaneously, we see our individual lives as connectedto a much larger, more complex world. Our singular

experiences are one story among thousands. And therewere thousands. And we all have a story to tell. (Guilloud)

The deconstruction of the dominant public sphere doesnot lead to a simple validation or relatively increasedvalidity of the counterpublic sphere, but to a deeperrecognition of the private sphere of the self and its par-ticipation in collective social articulation. Habermasdescribes the inextricability of the private (individu-al) and public (much larger, more complex world)spheres: the public sphere draws its impulses from theprivate handling of social problems that resonate in lifehistories (1996, p. 366), and problems voiced in thepublic sphere rst become visible when they are mir-rored in personal life experiences (p. 365). Selfhoodor citizenship thus entails a blurring of boundaries be-tween the public and the private. Narratives of personalidentity replace collective social scripts as bases forsocial order. Highly individualized identity processes(our singular experiences) function as interpersona

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012



14

linkages as network organization begins to displaceoverarching systems and institutional hierarchies thathitherto conferred recognition and induced conformity(Bennett, 2003: 146). Habermas notion of the reex-ivity of the internal and the external becomes the basisof Net-enabled creative empowerment or networkedindividualism (Wellman, 2000, np).The polycentric and non-hierarchical yet integrated

nature of networks opens them to popular participa-tion. While the degree of openness implies respectfor diverse identities, the plurality of voices may re-ect a plurality of purpose, or the networks lack of

ideological coherence. But Bennett rightly notes thatopenness to divergent views and concerted pursuit ofmultiple causes while focusing on a common target rather than ideological unity could make networkedcounterpublics particularly effective (2011, np). As aSeattle activist remarked, the protests at times with

slightly different messages, but with a common goalof democratizing the global economy [] made theBattle of Seattle such an important event (Almeida).The shift from consensus-oriented deliberation to adeeper discrete-issue-based democracy corresponds toHabermas conceptual shift from the public sphere asa unitary realm [] in which something approachingpublic opinion can be formed (1964, p. 49) to a net-work that synthesizes communication ows into topi-cally specied public opinions (1996, p. 360).

4. Facebook and Online ActivismFacebook, while ostensibly a platform for social net-working, could function equally effectively as a plat-form for online activism. It is becoming increasinglycommon for individuals to create cause-based Face-book pages or groups. Visitors freely post their com-ments, related videos and news items on such pages,voicing their views, stirring debates, and transformingthe Facebook wall into a forum for deliberation, ar-gumentation and discussion. Facebooks global reach,accessibility, and innovative methods of connectingpeople (by comparing lists of friends and identifyingmutual friends) allow users to engage with a varietyof causes and socio-political movements.

The 2008 Facebook movement in Colombia to expressoutrage against the guerrillas of the RevolutionaryArmed Forces of Colombia (known by its Spanish ini-tials, FARC) demonstrated Facebooks power and po-tential as a Habermasian public sphere. Between 2002and 2008, FARC had taken 700 Colombians hostage.

Sympathy and public anger about the plight of FARCshostages was widespread in the country, as was fearabout what the powerful revolutionary army might donext to disrupt civilian life and political processes. InDecember 2007, FARC announced that it would soonturn over Clara Rojas (a hostage), her four-year-oldson Emmanuel who had been born in captivity, andanother hostage to the Colombian government. For

the media, Emmanuel became a symbol a promiseof freedom from FARCs tyranny. As the media fren-zy about Emmanuels imminent release continued togrow, it emerged that he was not even in FARCs pos-session. The child had fallen ill a while earlier, hadbeen dumped with a peasant family, and was now un-expectedly in the governments hands, although mostgovernment ofcials including the president himself

were unaware of the fact. As news spread via the na-tional and private media, people began to express their

disgust at both FARC and the governments handlingof the matter, while also expressing their relief thatEmmanuel was safe (Kirkpatrick, 2011, pp. 12).

Oscar Morales, a young Colombian civil engineer andan avid Facebook user, was surprised to nd no anti-

FARC groups or activism on Facebook. Respondingto the media explosion around Emmanuels release, on4 January 2008 he created a Facebook public groupcalled One Million Voices Against FARC with a shortdescription of the groups purpose (quite simply to

stand up to FARC) and a logo overlaid with the fourpleas NO MORE KIDNAPPINGS, NO MORE LIESNO MORE KILLINGS, NO MORE FARC. In thecourse of the next six hours, 1500 people joined thegroup, and by late afternoon on 5 January, the grouphad 4000 members. People had begun posting mes-sages and opinions on the groups wall, and many ofthese generated organized and sustained discussionsamong members. Members soon began to speak notjust of their resentment against FARC, but what theyought to do about it. On 6 January, a consensus hademerged that the burgeoning group should go publicand by the time the group grew to include 8000 mem-bers, people had begun to post Lets DO somethingrepeatedly on the discussion board. The creation of apublic forum for discussion, the use of the Facebookwall as a feedback mechanism for peoples responsesand the resultant public deliberation had set the stagefor political action.

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012

17/66



Morales and other active members of the group decid-ed to stage a national march against FARC on 4 Febru-ary 2008, exactly a month after the groups formation.Morales insisted that the march should take place notonly in Bogota, Colombias capital, but also at otherlocations throughout the country, including his home-town of Barranquilla, and created an event called theNational March against FARC. Group members in

other cities (such as Miami, Buenos Aires, Madrid,Los Angeles, Paris and others), a signicant propor-tion of whom were Colombian migrs, argued that itought to be a global demonstration as they wanted tobe involved in the movement too. Group members thusbegan to plan a coordinated global march (Kirkpatrick,2011, p. 4).

What followed was a remarkable instance of digital-ly fuelled activism. According to press estimates, on

4 February about 10 million people marched againstFARC in hundreds of cities in Colombia. Almost 2 mil-lion others marched in other cities around the world.The mainstream media began covering plans for theupcoming demonstration, with stories focusing inten-sively on Facebook itself (a new American import inColombia at the time) as a channel for political mo-bilization. Print articles and television programmesgauged Facebooks efcacy in terms of the astonishing

extent to which it allowed young people to mobilizeagainst FARC without feeling threatened, but rather

by drawing courage from the strength of numbers andthe magnitude of popular sentiment. (It was particu-larly surprising that most Colombians who signed upfor the movement on Facebook did so under their realnames.)

As news and messages swiftly crossed over from theonline public sphere to the dominant sphere constitut-ed by the mainstream media in Colombia, the formersscope, scale and membership grew exponentially. Asymbiotic relationship was created between the twopublic spheres: the media drew heavily on the opin-ions, breaking news and demonstration informationprovided by the Facebook page, and the admiration andsupport of the mainstream media enhanced the cred-ibility of and awareness about the Facebook group.The political establishment also extended its full sup-port to the anti-FARC movement. Local army com-manders provided Morales with an armed escort, andmayors and city governments throughout Colombiaworked closely with demonstration volunteers to fa-

cilitate the march by granting march permits and sanc-tioning additional security. Even when the movementhad become a media sensation, Facebook remained thecentral source of information, means of mobilizationand promotional tool. Besides helping coordinate aglobal event and express public outrage on a massivescale, Morales anti-FARC movement had very realconsequences. The joint statement drafted by Morales

and his group was broadcast on television all over Lat-in America. Most signicantly, FARC acutely aware

of the impending march publicly announced immedi-ately prior to the march that they would release a num-ber of hostages, including several former Colombiancongressmen. In the weeks that followed, they releasedmany more (Kirkpatrick, 2011, pp. 46).

Although Facebook was not designed as a politicaltool, its creators realized intuitively that if the service

allowed people to reect their genuine identities on-line, a key aspect of their identities was likely to betheir views and passions about urgent contemporary is-sues (Mezrich, 2010). Facebooks founder, Mark Zuck-erberg, would subsequently say that the anti-FARCmovement was a very early indicator that governanceis changing [and of how] political organizations canform. These things can really affect peoples libertiesand freedom, which is the point of government. Infteen years maybe there will be things like what hap-pened in Colombia almost every day (Kirkpatrick

2011, p. 8). Indeed, four years after Morales stunningsuccess, one nds instances of political protest and

democratic participation generated, catalysed and sus-tained by Facebook in every country and communitywhere the service has gained currency.

5. Networked Civic EngagementHabermas perceives civic culture as the normativebedrock of the associational network of civil societyCivic culture comprises the set of preconditions for al

democratic participation. Indeed, the Internet has cometo play a signicant role in promoting and strengthen-ing civic culture. But it is not that the Internet makespeople want autonomy. It is simply that people search-ing for autonomy tend to turn to the Internet as theirmedium of choice. Under conditions of autonomouscitizenship and the operation of an open participatoryformal political channel, the Internet could begin totransform political engagement.

An open but formal communicative channel implies a

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012



16

regulatory mechanism to moderate the quality of dis-course. While online exchange is often informal andtangentially political but nonetheless sustains inter-personal and civic relationships (Coleman, 2007, p.372), the moderation of online intercourse can onlyenhance the quality of deliberation without detractingfrom the creation of social capital through the network.The rationalcritical argumentation among citizens that

constitutes meaningful deliberation within the Haber-masian public sphere can thus be maintained. The stud-ies that Coleman reviews (2007, pp. 370371) seemto indicate that more formally-structured modes ofonline talk yield a more focused exchange and ratio-nalcritical debate than relatively unstructured onlinepolitical talk and Usenet discussions. Departing fromHabermas normative ideal, unstructured Net forumsoften unwittingly privilege the right to speech over so-cial responsibility, leading to a profusion of personal

statements framed as evaluative positions (Pinter andOblak, 2006). Their claim to democratic communica-tion is supercial.

Moderated democratic deliberation is the critical fac-tor behind the continuing success of the Minnesota E-Democracys (MED) civic network, which reasonablyganizers of the DDS connected inhabitants and localpoliticians by linking the City Halls internal emailsystem with the DDS, and making municipal and otherlocal information available on an interactive electronic

bulletin board. Realizing the importance of a focuseddemocratic forum, the DDSs e-discussion groups weremoderated by informed specialists (van den Besselarand Beckers, 2005, p. 68).

Although the DDS initially met Dahlbergs norma-tive conditions, it was unable to preserve its autonomyfrom economic power. From a government-subsidizedcreative project, it changed into a self-sustaining non-prot organization, and ultimately into a commercial

company. There were concomitant shifts in its goals.When protability became the primary motive, the

DDS came to be considered solely from a cost angle,was found unsustainable, and liquidated (2005, p. 67).The latter phases of the DDSs evolution were charac-terized by better services at the cost of citizen partic-ipation and its aspirations to a democratic networkedcommunity was at odds with its rigidly topdown cor-porate structure. The cleavage between the founda-tions managers (who held decision-making powers)and the networks members led the latter to abandon

the DDSs democratic functions and use it merely as anInternet service and content provider (Castells, 2001pp. 15052)

The collapse of the DDSs autonomy due to the intru-sion of economic power reiterates the need for a demo-cratic space that is protected not just from the domi-nant discourse but from commercialization. The DDSs

shift from a participatory civic culture to a consumerculture throws into relief the possibility of the publicspheres refeudalization. The DDS failed as a publicsphere because rationalcritical debate [was] replacedby consumption, and the web of public communicationunravelled into acts of individuated reception (Hab-ermas, 1989, p. 161). Its post-privatization role as aservice provider led to a sharing of culture that was ajoint consumption rather than a more active participa-tion in mutual critique (Calhoun, 1992: 23). The com-

mercialization of the media fundamentally alters theircharacter and their relation to citizens: an exemplaryforum for democratic debate degenerates into just an-other domain for cultural consumption (Thompson1995, p. 74). While Thompson critiques Habermasconcept of refeudalization chiey on account of its ex-aggeration of consumers passivity (1990, p. 116), thepossible adverse effects of media commercializationare certainly very real.

Privatized forms of participation undermine the de-

liberative energy of civic networks, but a serious chal-lenge is also posed by other less demanding kinds ofpolitical engagement: there is an overwhelming pref-erence for direct individual-to-representative commu-nication, rather than for rationalcritical citizen-to-cit-izen dialogue. But individual-to-representative onlineservices tend to be inuenced and affected by those in

power by corporate backing and/or government web-sites tendency to sell policies and personalities thusretarding their overall democratic potential (Dahlberg2001b, pp. 61928). Despite providing a channel forcommunicating with politicians / political candidatesthe liberal individualist model reduces dialogue be-tween citizens, and citizens engagement with civicassociations, thereby impairing the creation of socialcapital. Individual discourse lacks the rationalcriticacharacter developed through debate; and divorced fromthe possible deliberative outcomes in civil society theindividual does not possess sufcient autonomy to sig-nicantly alter the political process. Hence individual-

to-representative interaction remains largely expres-

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012

19/66



sive, lacking the instrumental power of the publicsphere.

6. ConclusionThe utility of Habermas public sphere in contempo-rary media-rich societies becomes evident throughan assessment of the Internets ability to foster dem-ocratic deliberation. The features of the Internet as ademocratic space (its relation to the dominant publicsphere, the private self, civil society, civic culture; itsaccommodation of different perspectives, promotionof focused rationalcritical discussion; and the threatof its commercialization and degeneration into mereconsumerism) largely correspond to Habermas char-acterization of the public sphere. Although the Internethas unquestionably become a major medium in all in-dustrialized societies (Dahlgren, 2001a, p. 74), and isa better vehicle for extra-parliamentarian politics than

the traditional media, unqualied optimism about itsfunction as a public sphere should be resisted. Twoprovisos must be kept in mind. First, Internet growthhas been phenomenal, but its use is still far from uni-versal. Second, using the Internet to discuss / engagewith politics is a low priority, as compared to e-mail,information searches and business transactions (Dahl-gren, 2001b, p. 47; Sparks, 2001, pp. 839). Thus it isdifcult to conceive of the Internet as a substitute for

formal political structures. But as this essay has shown,it provides an important and (for many) easily acces-

sible deliberative space, embodying signicant demo-cratic potential.

Habermas (1996) reformulation of the public spheresignals a new critical project of rethinking democracyand social structures in terms of networks. Rigorouslyretheorizing the public sphere from the perspective ofsocial networks could yield important insights. The is-sue of power, in particular, needs to be problematized.While the bourgeois public sphere was essentially anexclusive power structure comprising the educated andpropertied elite, Habermas networked public sphereseems to elide the question of power, implicitly equat-ing a distributive network with an equitable distribu-tion of participatory power. Dahlberg notes that the rel-atively open deliberative space of the Internet may becolonized by pluralist interest groups and individu-alist participants (2007, p. 130). More interestingly,Castells points out that power in networks is controlledby programmers who are able to re/programme net-works purposes and goals, and by switchers who can

connect different networks to ensure their coopera-tion (2004, p. 32). Further research is needed to iden-tify these actors and thus locate the play of power in thecontext of Habermas public sphere. While Habermasaccounts for external threats to the public sphere (fromthe dominant discourse, commercialization, etc.), therecognition of possible threats from within would makethe theory both more realistic and relevant.

REFERENCES: Almeida, Tico, Personal Testimony, [http://depts

washington.edu/wtohist/testimonies/TicoAlmeida.htm]; accessed on 23.12.07. Bennett, W Lance, (2001), New Media Power: The

Internet and Global Activism, in Nick Couldry andJames Curran, eds, Contesting Media Power, Rowmanand Littleeld, London. Available at [http://depts.wash-ington.edu/gcp/pdf/bennettnmpower.pdf]; accessed on

20.12.07. (2003), Communicating Global Activism: Strengths

and Vulnerabilities of Networked Politics, Informa-tion, Communication and Society, 6(2): 14368. Calhoun, Craig, (1992), Introduction: Habermas and

the Public Sphere, in Craig Calhoun, ed, Habermasand the Public Sphere, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Castells, Manuel, (2001), The Internet Galaxy: Re-ections on the Internet, Business, and Society, Oxford

University Press, Oxford. (2004a), Informationalism, Networks, and the Net-

work Society: A Theoretical Blueprint, in ManuelCastells, ed, The Network Society: A Cross-CulturalPerspective, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. (2004b), The Power of Identity, Vol. 2, 2nd edn,

Blackwell, Oxford. Cleaver, Harry M, (1998), The Zapatista Effect: The

Internet and the Rise of an Alternative Political Fab-ric, Journal of International Affairs, 51(2): 62140. Coleman, Stephen, (2007), E-Democracy: The His-tory and Future of an Idea in Robin Mansell et al, eds

The Oxford Handbook of Information and Commu-nication Technologies, Oxford University Press, Ox-ford. Cover, Jane, Personal Testimony, http://depts.wash-ington.edu/wtohist/testimonies/JaneCover.htm]; ac-cessed on 23.12.07. Dahlberg, Lincoln, (2001a), Extending the Public

Sphere through Cyberspace: The Case of Minnesota E-Democracy, First Monday, 6(3). Available at [http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/ar-ticle/view/838/747]; accessed on 15.01.08.

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012



18

(2001b), The Internet and Democratic Discourse:

Exploring the Prospects of Online Deliberative ForumsExtending the Public Sphere, Information, Communi-cation and Society, 4(4): 61533. (2007), The Internet and Discursive Exclusion:

From Deliberative to Agonistic Public Sphere Theory,in Lincoln Dahlberg and Eugenia Siapera, eds, RadicalDemocracy and the Internet: Interrogating Theory and

Practice, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. Dahlgren, Peter, (2000a), Media, Citizenship and

Civic Culture, in James Curran and Michael Gure-vitch, eds, Mass Media and Society, 3rd edn, Arnold,London. (2000b), The Internet and the Democratization of

Civic Culture, Political Communication, 17(4): 33540. (2001a), The Transformation of Democracy?, in

Barrie Axford and Richard Huggins, eds, New Media

and Politics, Sage, London. (2001b), The Public Sphere and the Net: Structure,Space and Communication, in W Lance Bennett andRobert M Entman, eds, Mediated Politics: Communi-cation in the Future of Democracy, Cambridge, Cam-bridge University Press. Habermas, Jurgen, (1964), The Public Sphere: An

Encyclopedia Article, New German Critique, 1(3). (1989), The Structural Transformation of the Pub-lic Sphere, trans. Thomas Burger, Polity Press, Cam-bridge.

(1992), Further Reections on the Public Sphere, inCraig Calhoun, ed, Habermas and the Public Sphere,MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. (1996), Between Facts and Norms, trans. William

Rehg, Polity Press, Cambridge. Hatcher, Mark, (2003), Public Affairs Challenges for

Multinational Corporations, in Steve John and StuartThompson, eds, New Activism and the Corporate Re-sponse, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. Juris, Jeffrey, (2004), Networked Social Movements:

Global Movements for Global Justice, in Manuel Cas-tells, ed, The Network Society: A Cross-Cultural Per-spective, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham Kirkpatrick, David, (2011), The Facebook Effect,

Virgin Books, London. Mezrich, Ben, (2010), The Accidental Billionaires:

Sex, Money, Betrayal and the Founding of Facebook,Arrow, London. Palczewski, Catherine Helen, (2001), Cyber-move-ments, New Social Movements, and Counterpublics,in Robert Asen and Daniel C Brouwer, eds, Counter-

publics and the State, SUNY Press, Albany. Pinter, Andrej, and Tanja Oblak, (2006), Is There a

Public Sphere in This Discussion Forum?, in Katha-rine Sarikakis and Daya K Thussu, eds, Ideologies ofthe Internet, Hampton Press, Creskill, NJ. Rucht, Dieter, (2004), The Quadruple A: Media

Strategies of Protest Movements since the 1960s, inWim van de Donk et al, eds, Cyberprotest: New Media

Citizens and Social Movements, Routledge, London. Sassi, Sinikka, (2001), The Transformation of the

Public Sphere?, in Barrie Axford and Richard Hug-gins, eds, New Media and Politics, Sage, London. Sey, Arabella, and Manuel Castells, (2004), From

Media Politics to Networked Politics: The Internet andthe Political Process, in Manuel Castells, ed, The Net-work Society: A Cross-Cultural Perspective, EdwardElgar, Cheltenham. Sparks, Colin, (2001), The Internet and the Global

Public Sphere, in W Lance Bennett and Robert M En-tman, eds, Mediated Politics: Communication in theFuture of Democracy, Cambridge University PressCambridge. Thompson, John B, (1990), Ideology and Modern

Culture: Critical Social Theory in the Era of MassCommunication, Polity, Cambridge. (1995), The Media and Modernity: A Social Theory

of the Media, Polity, Cambridge. Van Aelst, Peter and Stefaan Walgrave, (2004), New

Media, New Movements?, in Wim van de Donk et al

eds, Cyberprotest: New Media, Citizens and SocialMovements, Routledge, London. van den Besselaar, Peter, and Dennis Beckers, (2005)

The Life and Death of the Great Amsterdam DigitaCity, in Peter van den Besselaar and Satoshi Koizumieds, Digital Cities III: Information Technologies forSocial Capital Cross-cultural Perspectives, SpringerAmsterdam. Wellman, Barry, (2000), Changing Connectivity: A

Future History of Y2.03K, Sociological Research On-line, 4(4). Available at [http://www.socresonline.orguk/4/4/wellman.html]; accessed on 25.12.07.

7/28/2019 Ijcd Jan - March 2012

21/66



Introduction:Development has been one of the major components

of the knowledge system in the social sciences. De-velopment is approached in a variety of ways by mod-ern thinkers across disciplines. Scholars, Economists,Statesman, International Agencies such as UN areconcerned with the problems aficting the humanity.

Many countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America,middle east have been grouped as under developedcountries. Most of the newly liberated nations aregearing up to meet the standards of developed coun-tries. Economists and world leaders are grappled withthe developmental realities around the world. The over

nous task of eradicating poverty, disease, mal nutri-tion, illiteracy, pollution is on the ma

ijcd jan - march 2012

Documents