By Morgen Makombo Sikwila
An important part of developing conditions that can uphold peace is for the population to be informed.
Peace education!
This is where journalists come in. Conflicts are unique, but some things are always likely to happen. Groups do not trust each other after they stop fighting since they were recent enemies. Governance is weakened. Silent voices are finally eager to express themselves. Latent voices can be heard through journalists.
Media contribution to conflict is more often noted than praise is given to its role in peacebuilding processes. Media and journalists are victims of conflict, but they also at times play active roles in exacerbating tensions in divided societies. In many respects, however, the news media and journalists are also at the forefront of peacebuilding initiatives because, when they function effectively, they are crucial for the safeguarding of peace and democracy. A reliable and diverse media that can express itself freely provides early warning of potential outbreaks of conflict. Media also helps alert and mobilize the international community on a particular crisis. During a peacebuilding process, it serves multiple purposes and is an important complement to almost every program pursued in different sectors. This write up explores those different dimensions.
Media and journalists are frequent victims of conflict. Censorship and governments controls of media, as well as attacks on journalists in pursuit of that goal, have been a feature of many modern conflicts, to the extent that the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) considers such occurrences to be warning signs of latent conflict. Media has also been used as a centerpiece of propaganda and hate speech, even in some contexts going so far as to call upon populations to take up arms against other civilians.
Modern historians have extensively studied the role of media in authoritarian movements and violent conflicts. The capability of the media to inflame hatreds and promote violence has been relatively well documented from early studies of the role of the radio in Nazi propaganda campaigns to the more recent examples of Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.
A glaring instance of this was the use of media for propaganda purposes by the Nazi Party in Second World War Germany. The use of propaganda in Nazi Germany is well recognized. The regime portrayed racist ideology as a scientific doctrine. Joseph Goebbels, head of the Nazi Propaganda Unit, depended on media in order to actuate messages of propaganda, using both the entertainment industry and radio. Goebbels further controlled the press school for journalists and had a hold over radio broadcasting. He induced the industry to produce affordable radio sets, installed loudspeakers in public places and sent radio wardens to monitor the use of those radios. Between 1933 and 1942, the German radio audience increased from 4.5 to 16 million. Hence, Nazi Germany is often cited as a paradigmatic case wherein media was used for propaganda to inflame racist ideology.
More recently, in Rwanda, hate speech disseminated through Radio-Télévision Libre des Mille Collines clearly played a crucial role in the 1994 genocide. Radio Mille Collines in particular broadcasted messages explicitly calling on the Interahamwe militias and regular Rwandan Hutus to attack the Tutsi and Twa minorities, as well as Hutu moderates. The media’s role in this case was so explicit that the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda has prosecuted members of the industry, including journalists and musicians.
Similarly, the Balkan wars were plagued with propaganda channeled through media, which propagated conflict. In Serbia in the late 1980s, Slobodan Miloševic cracked down on media dissent and distributed media propaganda, warning that a new generation of Serbs allegedly faced a ‘new genocide. This trend continued in the 1990s, as both Croatian and Bosnian media outlets engaged heavily in controlled sensationalist propaganda pitting Serbs against their Muslims neighbors. In this instance, while the explicit broadcast of hate messages was rare, the cumulative impact of biased coverage fuelled the hatred over a long period of time. The role of the media in the former Yugoslavia was to reinforce ethnic identities and fear between communities along ethnic lines, rather than explicitly to call for violence. The contribution of media to this atmosphere of fear was so clear that some have remarked that every bullet shot in Bosnia was supported by media activities.
Media also played an important role in the propaganda against the UN peacekeeping force (UNPROFOR) in the former Yugoslavia. The mission has been the permanent helpless victim of disinformation organized by the various parties and campaigns to destroy its credibility. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, during the war, even the rare ‘independent’ press organs linked to groups of intellectuals (particularly in Sarajevo) operated partly ‘under control,’ especially of the Party of Democratic Action (Stranka Demokratske Akcije, or SDA), which used them to criticize international institutions and the UN for specific purposes.
The media may be a useful tool for inciting conflict where it is able to influence perception and portray ‘others’ as responsible for their own marginalization and declining psycho-social and economic conditions. From the perspective of masses, identification of an ‘other’ gives logic to suffering by identifying a culprit that can be thwarted. Particularly in where populations are manipulated around ethnicity, it also frames some groups as primordially superior, allowing for the preservation of pride simply by virtue of group membership. Hannah Arendt observed this in totalitarian movements which she explains, “conjure up a lying world of consistency which is more adequate to the needs of the human mind than reality itself, in which, through sheer imagination, uprooted masses can feel at home and are spared the never-ending shocks which real life and real experiences deal to human beings and expectations.”
While leadership is a crucial component of any violent conflict, such movements are also dependent on mass perpetrators. Nazi Germany’s success in the final solution relied on ordinary citizens, just as Rwanda radio called upon the general population to commit genocide.
What modern historical cases, particularly Nazi Germany and Rwanda, exemplify is the role of media as a transformative tool; that is, in its capacity to encourage populations (masses) to follow and act in a violent movement. Peace scholar Johan Galtung has developed a typology of violence that seeks to describe this transformative capacity. Direct or acute violence is the most blatant manifestation of violence, amounting to infliction of physical harm.Structural violence is understood as those factors that cause peoples actual physical and mental realizations to be below their potential realizations, which can take the form of direct violence, poverty, repression, and alienation.
Cultural violence is a violence that occurs in the symbolic sphere of our existence through symbols, flags, hymns, speeches but also all kinds of texts produced in and by the media. In this typology, media, as a component of cultural violence, may be utilized to remind populations of the realities of structural and at times direct acts of violence inherent in everyday life. Propaganda also leads these masses to identify0 a perceived source (if not a reason) for their marginalization. In such contexts, media is a powerful tool to help disseminate the message. Where media has been used to encourage identification along ethnic divides, as in Bosnia, or to instigate violence along those lines, as in Rwanda, it has not acted alone but as a tool used to build upon a longer legacy of violence.
Wars are partly what the media make them, This diagnosis reflects the general recognition that the existence of a crisis, in particular a violent conflict, is now dependent on international news media coverage. Even if, by their very definition, the local media will always beat international organisations in spotting the potential for crises and reporting on a developing conflict; only when the story is judged big enough–perhaps when the shooting has started–will it make the international news. In that respect, the role of international media will always be decisive.
The digital revolution has increased this impact. The role of the media in mobilizing international public opinion, in particular when mass violence is committed, has been largely observed and analyzed in the last two decades. It is clear that the main politico-military entrepreneurs play increasingly on the rebound effect of international information, not hesitating to resort to the best specialized agencies for that purpose. Information management has become a major part in war strategy manipulating the media to get a tactical advantage over the enemy.
Indeed, journalists reporting can have an exacerbating, or conversely calming, effect on conflict. Information conveyed by the international media and foreign journalists has rebound effects in the countries themselves, as content is reproduced by the local media, through the Internet and international press. The discontinuous presence of international media is also important for local journalists because many of them work for as fixers and informers for their foreign colleagues. The way foreign journalists report on some aspects of the peacebuilding process may also influence the way local media will chose to cover these issues.
Together with accounts by representatives of NGOs or other international organizations, the combined action of various media, international and local, helps to fashion images and build up representations of what is happening. This remains largely the case during a peacebuilding process, at least where and when the attention of the international community remains strong. This is particularly the case in specific moments that are considered crucial peacebuilding junctures, such as during elections.
A reliable (i.e., accurate and balanced) and diverse media is essential to a peacebuilding process, in particular but not only its governance and democracy component.
Media helps disseminate information and represent a diversity of views sufficient for citizens to make well-informed choices and be able to participate in public life; media serves as a watchdog over leaders and officials, as well as other actors in the peacebuilding process. Media presence is essential in the monitoring of human rights and the functioning of other civil society actors; media coverage is essential during an electoral period, helping in raising awareness on other dimensions of peacebuilding processes and is therefore a vital support to many of its components in different sectors of activities.
Media can contribute to efforts to change attitudes in the general public; and has been shaped by the enhanced role of new technologies in peacebuilding processes (ICT for peacebuilding). A pluralistic media sector may allow a range of views and voices to be opened and therefore publicly expressed. Typically, in a conflict environment, a narrow range of extremist views tends to dominate, and credible information is tremendously difficult to access. During the peacebuilding process, transparent media can become a credible source of information and can support the expression of competing perspectives, therefore becoming a peaceful channel for public dialogue. Free and open communication helps prevent the manipulation of populations.
This level of communication and transparency is actually important at every stage of a peace process, including the negotiation (peacemaking) phase. Mediators and power brokers are often reluctant to communicate during negotiations, but securing a free flow of accurate and constructive information at this stage can help ensure sustainable agreements and prevent leaders from manipulating such negotiations to secure their own power and position.
During the peacebuilding phase, media is an even more important tool for policy makers to get their message out. This is also true of all peacebuilders, insiders and outsiders alike, as they need to inform the public about what activities are underway, raise public awareness, and educate citizens, the last of which is an important factor in improving popular participation in public life. In this sense, citizens rely on the media not only for basic information but also to explain complex negotiations and frame overall issues.This sort of communication is also one of the most effective tools in earning and building the confidence of the population in the peace process. It helps people feel connected to the reform plans.
An independent, lively, and widely accessible media can act as a third-party ‘watchdog’ that provides feedback to the public on local issues. Media can bring hidden stories out into the public. Investigative reports can surface public problems. This helps keep, not only the government, but also any other actor in the peacebuilding process (including the private sector or outsiders) accountable to the larger community. One aspect of this refers to financial accountability and good governance practices. In peacebuilding processes, measures are generally enforced to increase that accountability, but it is not always easy for the general public to understand issues of public resources. To address that problem, some radio stations have developed special programs on the issue. Pressuring governments into good governance is an essential long term function of an independent media sector.
A specific dimension of the monitoring work undertaken by the media is in regard to human rights violations. Media is a key partner for human rights organizations, even though they may sometimes be at odds with one other because they do not have the same methods. This is why it is so important to have journalists trained on these specific issues, so that they can come to understand the rationale for methods used by human rights practitioners and take these interests into account when reporting. More generally, media is a key partner for other civil society actors (of which it is part). It gives civil society organizations (CSOs) the means to monitor what is going on and contributes to CSOs advocacy functions. Indeed, in practice, there is significant overlap between civil society and media, particularly where media outlets take on specific advocacy functions.
The media is an important component in the administration of peaceful elections in fragile environments. Media offers voters access to information. For citizens to make well-informed decisions in an election there must be a free media. But the media must be more than free. It must be reliable. It must be trusted. It must have opportunity to form independent and diverse views. Information campaigns organized during electoral periods help inform citizenry about what to expect during an election, and can ensure that citizens know their rights and responsibilities as well as the rights and responsibilities of candidates, political parties, government bodies, and other organizations. A free press also helps highlight issues demanding governmental attention and permit public scrutiny of candidates’ competing political visions.
Every aspect of peacebuilding processes needs to be supported by awareness and information campaigns, as most such processes require awareness, understanding, and a minimum of public participation. Therefore, media is used not only to deliver general information on those processes but also to support targeted civic education campaigns in different sectors of activities.
In the security sector, particularly for disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR), small arms control and demining, and community securing and policing, but also for some dimensions of security sector reforms, media may assist with civic education. The diffusion of accurate information about the security situation is also crucial in order to counterbalance rumors and fears that can persist and be easily manipulated.
In economic recovery, the repatriation of refugees and the reintegration of displaced persons significantly depend on the information disseminated among these populations, as well as to the local communities. Journalists can also help CSOs distribute more accurate information about actual conditions in the field. A well prepared and conducted information campaign can build confidence and create conditions conducive to return. Public information on economic programs and relief aid, such as where to go to find services, is also key but often underestimated.
In justice and psycho-social recovery processes, each program relies on a public information and education component that is vital to its success. International organizations, as well as international and local CSOs, support media initiatives that disseminate information on peace processes, reconciliation, and justice initiatives, in particular human rights and transitional justice. Media was instrumental in disseminating information on the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission. These initiatives may not necessarily receive enough funds and support but they are crucial to the success of such processes.
Media contribute to changing popular attitudes particularly those initiatives oriented towards peace, may actually support change in attitudes, helping to modify perceptions of ‘others’ and facilitate reconciliation between divided groups. There is a graduation between public information and awareness, and a process that would actually lead to conflict transformation. The most obvious effect of media is in its ability to increase cognitive knowledge by supplying people with information. Some also believe that specific well-crafted messages and media formats have been effective in modifying and altering attitudes. However, such effects are difficult to assess and measure. This is where experts have advocated for a proactive role for media in peacebuilding. Johan Galtung coined the term ‘peace journalism,’ an idea that advocates for conflict transformation through constructive discourse: This kind of journalism is openly inclined to peace discourse, and cannot be achieved through the ordinary distribution of information. It requires a proactive approach to the constructs of reporting, and openly admits a bias towards peaceful ways of addressing conflict.
Media has the potential to counter misconceptions of the ‘enemy’ and help reduce the level of rumours in society and build confidence amongst warring parties, build consensus and allow face saving. Media facilitate communication between conflicting parties and provide an outlet for emotional expression. Media analyse the conflict, educate on the process of conflict resolution; propose options and solutions to the conflict and influence the balance of power in conflict.
These initiatives extend past the traditional focus of media-related initiatives on conventional journalism, supporting the emergence of normative ideas of good governance and democratic development, particularly in post-conflict environments. Moreover, the newer category of media-related peacebuilding goes beyond the traditional disengaged journalistic role. It is designed to have an intended outcome: a reduction of conflict among citizens. Rather than merely informing, material is selected for its potential in transforming conflict, by shifting attitudes of the parties involved in conflict, by providing essential information. Media professionals are encouraged to give more coverage to peacebuilding efforts, including to reconciliation and inspirational stories of personal transformation. This approach extends from traditional journalism media into avenues such as popular music, soap operas, call-in shows, community radio and video projects, street theater, wall posters, and concerts. It can be highly effective, particularly in conflict-ridden areas where audiences can be more receptive to information presented in an entertaining form.
The power of global communications can be of great benefit to the cause of peace, although not all people benefit to the same extent and there is a strong argument that the poorest are further marginalized as information ‘have-nots.’ As a consequence, different initiatives have been taken to ensure greater use of these technologies in support of peacebuilding. Information and communication technologies for peacebuilding activities are very broadly defined at present, but they generally imply the use of new information and communication technologies in the vast range of activities carried out in relation to armed conflict, including conflict prevention and management, peace operations, humanitarian relief and disaster assistance, and post-conflict peacebuilding and reconstruction.
Mobile initiatives are now considered capable of providing “greater opportunities for social impact that other information and communication technology (ICT) projects do not necessarily share. For example, physical access to mobile phones is obviously much greater compared to computers and other less readily available technologies. With rapid mobile phone penetration in many areas of the globe and growing global network coverage, access is increasingly assured. They also are more affordable and require less skill, and, as a consequence, less training. For instance, the use of cell phone text messaging by human rights advocates, religious leaders, and other members of local civil society was crucial in the events that followed the December 2007 presidential election in Kenya, demonstrating how this technology may be a vital tool for conflict management and prevention.
The Internet has also provided a range of media that has been increasingly used in peacebuilding contexts, improving dissemination of information and enhancing capacity for networking and knowledge exchange. Tremendous growth has occurred in ‘citizen journalism’ through user-generated media, which begins with more independent, individualistic production of blogs, text messages, wikis, etc., but take their power from the social networking capabilities of these new technologies. These platforms have multiplied, including on issues directly related to conflict transformation, democracy, and peacebuilding.These spaces can promote and strengthen voices that are not featured in mainstream media. The limit of an extensive use of such technologies is that, in many countries, access to the Internet is extremely limited beyond the capital and major cities, and the quality of the connections too poor for use beyond checking email. Yet, some feel this form of community and user-generated media may represent the next generation in programs for peace building.
Journalists should improve trust, governance, and inclusion, all factors that are included in all peacebuilding processes; without agenda settings. The main thing journalists can do is to inform the largest number of people impacted by conflict and its realities. Numbers, pictures and most importantly, stories that were hidden and unable to come to the surface are now more important than ever. Journalists can help the peacebuilding processes with right tools, knowledge and be ethical in practice.
Morgen Makombo Sikwila
Masters in Peace and Governance
BSc Counselling
Diploma in Environmental Health Health
Certificate in Environmental Health
email address: morgensikwilam@gmail.com
Phone number: 0772823282
