Media as Intervention

Conflict is omnipresent in modern life. One-sixth of humanity is currently engaged in political or military strife. Until recently, international response to conflict has been focused on emergency relief. When war breaks out, the international community arrives armed with blankets, medicines and occasionally a well-laid out plan to end hostilities. This type of support is undoubtedly vital. Yet it is only part of the picture. The needs of those caught up in war clearly transcend the material goods and short-term relief proffered by the aid agencies. One of these is the need to be informed. In recent years, media has emerged as an essential tool in combatting the tragic effects of war on civilians by providing them with long-term and sometimes life-saving social support through the mechanisms of information.

Following the Rwandan genocide in 1994, the first relief workers on the scene reported seeing scores of Hutus fleeing their villages with little more than the shirts on their backs and transistor radios to their ears. That radio in Rwanda should play such a pivotal role in the aftermath of the genocide is hardly surprising, considering the role it played prior to the outbreak of the carnage. Not since the Nazi propaganda speeches of World War II has media been credited with having such a direct influence on inciting violence. The Hutu-led, anti-Tutsi, Radio-Television Mille Collines has now become a genocidal icon. Synonymous with the term 'hate-media', it is a name that has come to evoke fear.

Founded nine months prior to the April plane accident in which both the Rwandan and Burundi presidents died, followed shortly afterwards by the outbreak of killing, Radio Mille Collines was a popular station that successfully played upon the existing deep-seated fears and animosities between the Hutu and Tutsi populations. The sophisticated use of humour and professional delivery was interspersed with popular Zairean music. Contrasted with the musically boring Rwandan state radio, Radio Mille Collines quickly developed a faithful audience amongst the young who eventually transformed themselves into the ruthless Interhamwe.

Much has been written and hypothesised about the role Radio Mille Collines played in the Rwandan tragedy. Content analysis has revealed that the radio station's approach was particularly subtle. It was only when the genocide actually erupted that openly racist comments such as "stamp out the cockroaches" were aired. Although direct cause and effect has never been proven, Radio Mille Collines has played a crucial role in alerting the international community to the dangers of hate-media.

Today, there is a general consensus that media can play a significant role in conflict situations, not only in provoking hate and killing, but also in promoting conflict resolution, management and reconciliation. In an ironic twist, research shows that the most effective combination for successful communication is a well-thought out mixture of entertainment and 'desired outcome' programming - exactly what made Radio Mille Collines so popular. This is what many media projects in conflict areas strive to achieve, with varying results.

Media intervention in conflict areas can be divided into two broad categories. The first is centered on traditional journalism. This seeks to report conflicts for a general audience in a manner aimed at promoting peace rather than inflaming existing tensions. The second is more pro-active. It seeks to focus on media designed for specific audiences with a pre-determined agenda. Both approaches are rapidly developing in different directions and both are inciting as many new critics as adherents.

According to research undertaken by New York University's Center for War, Peace and the News Media, journalists and media practitioners can have a significant impact on helping to prevent deadly conflict by assuming conflict-preventing functions. These include channeling communication among the different parties through confidence building and by counteracting misperceptions. They also seek to 'de-objectify' the protagonists for each other by encouraging a balance of power and by identifying the various interests underlying each issue (see Robert Karl Manoff's article, p. 11). Should journalists undertake this type of engagement? Is this not a distortion of the traditional 'neutral' and 'objective' stance of many journalists? This is a question often asked by professionals during discussions about media and peacebuilding. In fact, there need not be a contradiction between solid, 'objective' journalism and the production of programmes which aim to promote peace rather than war.

The role of journalists is to provide a forum in which society can reflect itself. All too often, however, mass media succumbs to sensationalism in conflict situations. Journalists give airtime or print space to the most radical positions, or conduct interviews or moderate debates with techniques designed to incite discord rather than help appease tension. Yet by consciously assuming a role of intermediary among the opposing parties, by actively helping to immediately dispel a rumour, or by producing stories underlying points of agreement rather than areas of discord, journalists can play an important role in helping conflicting parties make initial steps towards resolving their differences. Not only does this approach not detract from 'objective' journalism - it may actually enhance the opportunity for good journalism to have a real impact on its audience.

Emphasising points of agreement between parties is at the heart of the work undertaken by one of the leaders in the field of media intervention in conflict zones, the Washington-based non-governmental organisation Search for Common Ground and its Brussels-based counterpart, the European Center for Common Ground. A third branch of this organisation, Common Ground Productions, focuses specifically on media production of conflict-resolution programmes. The 'Common Ground' approach is centred on the idea that by bringing parties to the table, distorted perceptions of the opposition are clarified, major issues of contention are focalised and individuals may feel they have an invested interest in de-escalating the crisis. Media projects include news bulletins, soap operas, documentaries and children's television (see Sheldon Himmelfarb's article, p. 38).

Two programmes, in particular, merit attention. Search for Common Ground's radio station Studio Ijambo in Bujumbura, Burundi, produces a highly successful soap opera with a team of Hutu and Tutsi journalists for a nationwide audience. Studio Ijambo is the only institution in the country to actively seek to combine Hutus and Tutsis in the same working environment. This, in itself, is a symbol of hope in such a divided country. Common Ground Productions Talking Drum Studio in Monrovia, Liberia, seeks to tackle the war in its soap opera, "The Refugee". It also produces objective news bulletins which are broadcast on as many stations as possible throughout the country. The Search for Common Ground modus operandi is to produce news and features in a production studio and then distribute them widely through local and national media outlets. In this manner, emphasis is placed on gaining credibility for the specific programme rather than the station broadcasting it.

The Hirondelle Foundation, a media organisation based in Lausanne, Switzerland, takes a different approach. Swiss journalists from Reporters Sans Frontieres, a media advocacy group, responded to the Rwandan genocide by establishing Radio Agatashya in an attempt to counteract the hate-speech effects of Radio Mille Collines. Radio Agatashya broadcast from Bukavu, Zaire, for months following the genocide and is now credited as being the first 'humanitarian' radio station ever established in a conflict zone. Difficulties working with Rwandan authorities, however, doomed the station's chances of ever operating in Rwanda and fighting in the former Eastern Zaire eventually forced Radio Agatashya's closure. Nevertheless, the experience was crucial in demonstrating the strengths and weaknesses of working directly in areas affected by war. In particular, it underlined the importance of establishing proximity with an audience living in a conflict zone.

This was also the Hirondelle Foundation's experience in Monrovia, Liberia, where it is operates Star Radio, an FM and SW station reaching both the capital and many parts of the country, including neighbouring Sierra Leone. Because of Star Radio's ability to cover events hour by hour, other media in the country have had to keep pace in terms of accuracy and news credibility. In addition, Star Radio's news broadcast are made available worldwide via the Internet with the unexpected result being increased pressure for accountability placed on Liberian authorities by the far-flung Liberian diaspora.

Field-based operations such as those operated by the Hirondelle Foundation and Common Ground Productions highlight the advantages of locally based media interventions. At the same time, it is clear that in some areas of fighting it is simply impossible to establish a presence on the ground. This is where radio more than any other medium can play an important role, especially international broadcasters.

One example is the BBC World Service in Afghanistan. For the past 20 years, the BBC has been the single most important source of information for the Afghan population. In many respects, it functions as a 'local' radio. Five years ago, the Pashto and Persian services began a soap opera, "New Home, New Life," as a way of transmitting vital information about survival in war zones. Themes as diverse as cholera prevention, breastfeeding, agricultural techniques and landmine awareness are presented three times a week in Pashto and in Persian as residents in Upper Village and Lower Village go about their daily business of life, love and intrigue. Conflict resolution is tackled on a local level.

Each month producers, based in Peshawar, Pakistan, meet with representatives of locally based NGOs to discuss story lines. In this way, important information related to timely health or environmental issues can be broadcast in a manner extremely relevant to the audience. Afghan writers ensure that the material is culturally suitable and entertaining. "New Home, New Life" has been hugely successful in that it has managed to not incur the open wrath of the ruling fundamentalist leaders of Afghanistan, the Taleban. The soap opera focuses on conflict-resolution themes as they relate to local issues. "New Home, New Life" does not openly tackle what many in the West consider to be large-scale human rights abuses against Afghan women; instead it has sought to push forward the boundaries of what is permissible and has provided a neutral space in which gender issues can begin to be discussed.

Compromise is an essential element in all conflict prevention and management media projects. Managers of media interventions often find themselves having to strike a careful balance between maintaining a working relationship with local authorities and remaining true to their goal of providing listeners with information designed to improve their well-being.

One of the first stumbling blocks organisations often have to overcome concerns establishing a presence in a conflict area in a manner which is not seen as cultural imperialism or worse. At the same time, if a broadcaster such as the BBC already has a highly credible reputation as a news broadcaster among local populations, such intervention is made substantially easier.

The Hirondelle Foundation recently held a conference in Geneva, Switzerland, to examine the question of "The Legitimacy of Intervention for Peace by Foreign Media in a Country in Conflict". The two-day workshop, which drew top media and conflict experts from around the world, concluded that media intervention during an open conflict situation should meet certain criteria. These included receiving a mandate from the international community to legitimise the intervention and ensure that it occurs with other forms of assistance. Local staff need to be involved in regular content reviews to make certain that information broadcast is both accurately and effectively portrayed to its audience. Strict impartiality is also crucial, as is complete transparency.

But even such guarantees do not mean that foreign media interventions are necessarily welcome in conflict areas. Some representatives from developing world countries argue for the establishment of contracts between organisations managing media projects and local authorities. These contracts would presumably give local officials a right to oversee and even control content. This, however, is an untenable option for media practitioners working in war zones. For them, receiving and transmitting impartial information should be considered a basic human right which should remain completely outside any form of government or military control.

Foreign media interventions in conflicts are fraught with potential difficulties and even dangers. For that reason, some international donors have focused their attention on supporting local efforts instead. Radio B 92 in Belgrade, for example, has received tremendous support from Western organisations precisely because it is a local station which has taken a strong anti-government, anti-war stance in the former Yugoslavia. But significant dangers are also inherent when local journalists attempt to produce programming designed to have an impact on a conflict situation. Often, even taking a position perceived as being against the conflict may be seen as partisan.

Another potential stumbling block to the establishment of media intervention in war zones is the capacity to measure its effectiveness. Evaluation is a crucial element in any project proposal - and donors often insist on some means of impact assessment. While Johns Hopkins University and others have provided well-established models for the evaluation of media programs focusing specifically on behaviour change related to health, little work has been done on the impact of the media itself, particularly with regard to attitudes and behaviour change concerning conflict.

One of the most extensive surveys to date concerns the BBC's Afghan education drama, "New Home, New Life". The daily squabbles and village predicaments of the characters capture the regular attention of 47 percent of the Afghan population, according to preliminary results from a recent survey of 60,000 respondents. The survey also revealed that listeners were twice as likely to avoid injury from landmines because of their awareness of landmine dangers. This remarkable conclusion adds substantial weight to the argument that media can make a significant impact on survival in humanitarian situations.

There is a need for donors to recognise that knowledge acquisition in conflict zones is, in itself, extremely important for the well-being of the audience. The psychological effect of information in situations where uncertainty and fear reign is immeasurable. Giving people a sense of control over their destiny by providing them with listener-friendly information about their current environment is a crucial step in helping defuse the tension and chaos which often characterise countries at war. Even so, significant developments have been made in the evaluation of media projects in conflict areas. Common Ground Productions has recently commissioned research in Liberia which resulted in the establishment of a new technique for assessing the impact of programmes in war zones (see Himmelfarb's article, p. 38).

Media intervention in war zones is still in its adolescence. It is also very much focused on broadcast media. This is because in many parts of the world conflicts occur in countries where illiteracy levels are high and newspapers expensive. In addition, newspapers and television stations are often the first casualties of war, leaving radio as the most effective means of communication. There are exceptions to this rule - Northern Ireland being a case in point.

The conflict in Northern Ireland is notable for its almost complete lack of pro-active media intervention. This appears to be due to a rather rigid interpretation of the role of journalism by reporters working in the province and because any pushing of the peace process can itself be interpreted as being sectarian and partial. There has, however, been one noteworthy initiative which deserves attention.

The predominantly Catholic newspaper and the predominantly Protestant newspaper published in Belfast agreed a few years ago to print joint editorials during times of strife in an attempt to diffuse tension. There has never been any research done to measure the impact of this approach, but experiences from other conflict areas indicate that opinion leaders can have a significant impact on the overall attitudes of the general population, particularly in as stratified an environment as Northern Ireland.

Recently Northern Ireland became the focus of world attention following the bomb blast in Omagh, the deadliest terrorist event in the province's history. Here the media was activated to provide the role of a forum for the outpouring of national grief. Psycho-social issues were explored in news articles and television and radio reports as the country struggled to make sense of the violence. In this instance, Northern Irish media, perhaps even unintentionally, assumed the function of helping the population restore itself after a particularly traumatic experience.

Indeed, it is often once active conflict has ended that media may be most effective. By making available space or airtime for the expression of grievances, media is encouraging an essential part of the healing process. During the period of reconciliation and rehabilitation, media can also serve to empower groups which had previously been voiceless. Television, radio and print material can provide specific social support for categories of people who had become disenfranchised during the war, such as landmine victims or women. In short, media has an essential role in the rebuilding of civil society.

In Bosnia, however, research has shown that media projects designed to help restructure society have instead largely failed. According to Gordon Adam of the Radio Partnership and Kirk Wolcott of the Carter Center, messages the international community wanted to put across to Bosnians through media intervention - such as the benefits of non-ethnic democracy, the safe return of refugees and the extradition of war criminals - were all highly contentious and essentially undeliverable in a society which still has many scores to settle, and would be doing so if there were not 35,000 foreign troops in the way.

This analysis underlies a fundamental truth in broadcasting in conflict zones. If the audience feels the message is imposed upon them from outside, it is highly unlikely they will be receptive to it. That is why, for media intervention to be successful, local partnerships are crucial. Careful research, including needs assessment and monitoring, is critical. Significant thought has to be given to encouraging communication amongst people in conflicts using the media as a catalyst for discussion amongst peer groups. This is one of the most promising routes to behaviour change, and it implies not just the provision of information, but the establishment of sustainable channels of communication. Implicit in this is the media's role in strengthening civil society, to allow the freedom to communicate which can lead to social change, including peace.

Based in Geneva, Loretta Hieber works with Lifeline Media, a programme using radio to help manage conflict worldwide.

CONTENTS    HOME