Recomendaciones

Commonly, development is understood as a type of directed social change that provides individuals with increased control over nature. Hence, development communication (DevCom) can be defined as communication devoted to planned social change (cf. Rogers 1989, pp. 67 and 72)⁷. In the context of development, mass communication is generally used to encourage the public to support and/or

7 More detailed is the definition of James C. Lange (cf. 1984, p. 72) who defines development as a measure of the opportunity that citizens have to obtain an adequate physical standard of living, to determine their own social and intellectual horizons, and to participate in political decisions which affect them.

participate in certain projects. The discussion on the role of mass media in the development process has passed through four major stages:

1 Modernisation (1945 - 1965) 2 Dependency (1965 - 1975)

3 Another Development (1975 - 1980) 4 Oramedia/Multiplicity (since 1980)

The modernisation paradigm is one of the oldest Western development concepts, and its roots can be traced back to the ancestors of sociology, Auguste Comte and Claude Henri de Rouvroy Saint-Simon (cf. Kunczik 1985, pp. 34 - 35). But the most influential representative of the growth theories was Walt Wiltham Rostow (cf. 1960) who claimed that any society would - irrespective of its sociocultural and economic context - develop from a traditional into a modern society. Other directions of social change were excluded.

The role of the mass media in this unilinear process, which is sometimes referred as „Westoxification” (cf. Mowlana 1997, p. 6), was clearly outlined: They should act as both an index and agent of needed change to enable the people to understand and to participate in the new nation and to empathise with those around it (cf. Hachten 1968, p. 101; Otto 1969, p. 32). The debate on the contribution of mass communication to the modernisation process was mainly based on the works of Daniel Lerner, Lucian Pye, and Wilbur Schramm. The three scientists took the imperturbable view that the introduction of modernising institutions, such as schools and mass media, would lead to economic growth and, sooner or later, to democratic political systems (cf. Lerner 1958; Pye 1963;

Schramm 1964).

Another theoretical approach, which can be regarded as the social realisation of the modernisation theory, was the diffusion model whose relevance for communication research had been realised by Paul Lazarsfeld, Bernhard Berelson, and Hazel Gaudet (cf. 1955) on the occasion of the presidential elections in the USA in 1940. Everett M. Rogers is said to be the scientist who introduced the diffusion model into the context of development. In his influential work „Diffusion of Innovations”, which was first published in 1962, Rogers defined diffusion as

„(...) the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system. Diffusion is a

special type of communication concerned with the spread of messages that are new ideas.” (Rogers 1983, pp. 34 - 35)

The decision to adopt or to reject an innovation was regarded as a mental process passing through five stages: knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation. The study culminated in the assertion that mass media were potent instruments in creating awareness of innovations whereas interpersonal communication was more effective in forming and changing attitudes towards a new idea (cf. ibid., pp. 35 - 36). Since mass communication existed in so-called

„advanced societies”, Rogers proposed that developing countries should consider the same infrastructural ideas. The diffusion theory is still prevalent today in many DevCom programmes, above all in health and literacy campaigns (cf. Mowlana 1997, pp. 191 - 192).

Generally, the modernisation paradigm has been criticised because of its ethnocentric point of view, the simple classification into traditional and modern societies, and the linear view of social change (cf. Jika 1988, p. 108; Hedebro 1982, p. 22). But the most basic reason for criticism of the modernisation model is simple: it does not work (cf. Servaes, Malikhao 1991, p. 7). This finding became first evident in the mid-1960s and paved the way for the a new period of DevCom, the dependency phase. Servaes and Malikhao (cf. ibid.) state that the so-called „dependencia” emerged from the convergence of two intellectual reasons: on the one hand, the neo-Marxism or structuralism and, on the other hand, the Latin American debate on development that ultimately formed the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA) headed by Raúl Prebisch (cf. 1950). As a result of his ECLA report, Prebisch is often considered the initiator of the dependency theory in today’s literature (cf. Kunczik 1985, p. 141).

Other influential dependistas were Paul A. Baran, André Gunder Frank, and Immanuel Wallerstein. Baran (cf. 1957) was one of the first who articulated the interrelation of development and underdevelopment, i. e., he regarded them as the two sides of the same coin. Moreover, Baran presumed that the post-colonial dependence was ensured by the reproduction of capitalistic socioeconomic and political structures in peripheral countries (cf. Servaes, Malikhao 1991, p. 8).

Frank (cf. 1969) claimed that direct colonial control had been replaced with neo-imperialistic mechanisms, e. g., development aid and international loans, and that these Western creations hampered the progress of the nation states. Finally, Wallerstein’s „World System Theory” (cf. 1974) looked upon the underdevelopment of the periphery as a basic requirement for the development of the centre (cf. Kunzcik 1985, pp. 143 and 148).

From the angle of dependency-theoretical approach, the role of mass communication is strongly connected with the thesis of cultural imperialism (cf.

Amupala 1989, p. 10) and the centre-periphery pattern as exemplified in the work of Johan Galtung (cf. 1971; Galtung, Ruge 1965). Galtung’s hypothesis can be summarised in four statements characterising international news (cf. Mowlana 1997, p. 44):

1 preponderance of centre news events reported in the world press systems;

2 larger discrepancy in the news exchange ratios of centre and periphery nations than in the exchange ratios of center nations;

3 higher proportion of occupation of the foreign news content in the media of periphery nations by centre news than reversely;

4 relatively little or no flow of news among periphery nations, expecially across colonial-based bloc borders.

Expressis verbis, the media are looked upon as one-way bridges on which Western values and ideas are carried into developing countries. Whereas modernisation theorists regarded internal factors, e. g., shortage of capital or management, as hindrances to social change, the dependistas assumed that the origins of underdevelopment had to be sought in external factors, more precisely, in the global structures. They argued that the domination of the periphery by the centre occured through a combination of several power components, such as military, economy, politics, and culture. Therefore, the only alternative for developing countries would be to disassociate themselves from the world market and to attain self-reliance, both economically and culturally. Several attempts were made to achieve these ends, e. g. the formulation of the New International Economic Order (NIEO) in 1974 and the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO) in 1976. Another case in point was the demand for „Development Journalism” which was first articulated by the research personnel of the University of Los Banos/Phillipines. Here, the mass media should be utilised to reduce social inequalities. After the creation of the Press Foundation of Asia in 1967, this conception also made its appearance in the public discourse (cf. Kunczik 1986, pp. 263 - 264).

Criticism of the dependency paradigm has been three-fold: First, developing countries are too weak in economic respects to operate autonomously. Second, the theory is so closely based on the social structure of Latin America that it is not

really applicable to other developing regions. Third, dependencia focuses on the causes for underdevelopment but does not offer well-devised solutions.

As a consequence, the Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation, which was named after the Swedish UN general secretary and Nobel prize winner (1905 - 1961), elaborated the concept of Another Development (AD) in 1975. On the one hand, the approach took the dependency-theoretical demand for NWICO into account, but, on the other hand, provided clearly defined recommendations for its realisation. AD emphasised the importance of cultural identity of local communities and of democratisation and participation at all levels - individual, local, national, and global (cf. Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation 1975). This precondition led to a strategy not merely considering the grassroots but largely emanating from them (cf. Servaes 1995, p. 30). Here, the role of communication was the „conscientisation” of the people to ensure their full participation in the decision-making process. This task was regarded as a prerequisite for the achievement of a need-oriented, self-reliant, and endogenous society being aware of the potential of local ecosystems (cf. Anonymous 1976, p. 10). The participatory model is based on the ideas of Paulo Freire (cf. 1972). The Brasilian educationalist insisted that subjugated peoples had to be treated as mature human beings in any political process. This concept implied dialogical communication (cf. Servaes 1995, p. 31). But since education from the top could never be a dialogue, Freire refused the use of mass media. Consequently, he utilised alternative medial techniques for his literacy campaigns, such as photography, slide projection, and tape recording (cf. Grossenbacher 1988, p. 29).

Whereas the modernisation approach has been considered to be US-American, dependencia to be Latin American, and the concept of Another Development to be European, the fourth and actual stage has often been marked as African, mainly because of the dominant role of West African communication researchers and their Oramedia ideology (cf. Kivikuru 1990, p. 19). According to its most renowned proponent, Frank Owu Ugboajah (cf. 1987, p. 197), Oramedia are understood as Africa’s traditional and old-established communication media. Due to the high acceptance and credibility of the Oramedia, they are successful in establishing interpersonal contacts, and, thus, they can be used for mobilisation purposes in DevCom. Here, the conventional mass media are regarded as supplementation since they are able to draw the people’s attention to development initiatives (cf. ibid., p. 199). The domain of the Oramedia is the rural

sector where about 70 % of Africa’s population live and interact (cf. Jefkins, Ugboajah 1986, p. 156).

Unfortunately, no skillful research has been conducted on the effectiveness of Oramedia in African development until today. But an idea how it could work provides the survey of Suresh Chandra Sharma who investigated the interrelation of communication and development in four villages in Rajasthan in the mid-1980s. The study reveals that mass media are more effective among people with a high socioeconomic status (SEC), whereas „folkmedia” have a greater impact on individuals with a low SEC (cf. Sharma 1987, pp. 170 - 171). Owing to scholars like Jan Servaes, the Oramedia approach is nowadays also accepted by academics in Europe and America. Hence, it is to be hoped that further research will supply the required empirical data and a more profound theoretical foundation. Servaes’

own Multiplicity model goes in this direction (cf. Servaes 1995, p. 26):

1 All nations are dependent upon one another. Consequently, internal as well as external factors inevitably influence the development process.

2 Development has to be studied in a global context in which both centre and periphery as well as their interrelated subdivisions have to be taken into consideration.

3 More attention is being paid to the content of development which implies a multiplicity of approaches based on the context and the basic, felt needs, and the empowerment of the most oppressed sectors of various societies at divergent levels.

4 There is no universal model for development. Each society must create its own strategy.

By now, it is evident that no all-embracing view on development is on offer. None of the above-mentioned theoretical perspectives has achieved and maintained explanatory dominance; each of them still finds support among scientists, politicians, international organisations, and the general public. A revitalised modernisation perspective, in which some of the errors of the past were eradicated, has remained the dominant paradigm in practice but becomes increasingly more difficult to defend in theory. Although the promising Oramedia/mulitplicity approach has gained ground in academic spheres, it is still looked upon as playground of visionaries by the planners of development strategies (cf. Servaes, Malikhao 1991, p. 13).

3 Methodological Aspects

In carrying out research on developing countries, scientific investigators are usually confronted with two major problems: first, the lack of relevant material, and, second, the socioeconomic distance from the object of inquiry.

To start with the latter and more difficult problem, it has to be admitted that most of the Western surveys on ACR have been conducted from ethnocentristic perspectives. Here, the problem often has not been the ill-will of single investigators to ignore the particularities of the field of research but the inability to approach the task with adequate skills and techniques. Interesting methodological attempts, such as the „Natural Sociology” of Schatzmann/Strauss (cf. 1973) or Molefi Asante’s „Afrology” (cf. 1987, pp. 16 - 17; 1989, pp. 60 - 61), have not yet entered the discipline of communication science. Consequently, the basic requirement for successful social sciences, i. e., to reveal the social environment of the objects of investigation, has often remained a secret (cf. Lamnek 1988, p.

18).

The Tanzanian government tries to safeguard the performances of scientists from abroad by demanding an official research clearance. The clearance is issued by the Tanzania Commission for Science and Technology (COSTECH) after the qualifications of the applicant and the usefulness of the proposed work for the United Republic were assessed. The scheme includes both hindrances and benefits: on the one hand, the evaluation process lasts several months and is costly, but, on the other hand, admission to all relevant institutions and archives is granted in the case of a successful application. Moreover, COSTECH assigns a so-called „professional sponsor”, i. e., a Tanzanian scientist who supports the foreign researcher in his/her project. A separate but similiar system is used on Zanzibar.

This arrangement was so fruitful for the study in hand that general methodological considerations can be deduced from it. Ayub Rioba, ex-journalist and now tutor at the Tanzania School of Journalism (TSJ), was heart and soul for the survey so that the gathering of data and the establishment of contacts was easily to manage within a few weeks time. Furthermore, he assisted in designing the study by pointing out its priorities and verified the results of interviews and discussions.

Summing up, it may be said that the general demands for multidisciplinary approaches (cf. Ochola, p. 52) or Paul F. Lazarsfeld’s (cf. 1952, p. 488) demand

for the co-operation with „area specialists” are not enough. The social environment of the object of investigation will remain hidden unless a member of the inquired society is incorporated into the research process. In other words, studying the communicative behaviour and performances of international communities can only be successful if the analysed objects - or at least parts of them - become results-evaluating subjects.

Another common problem of investigations on developing societies is the lack of relevant material. Most often, the outcome of these sometimes really deplorable conditions are insufficient comprehension and wrong assertions. Hence, Ulrich Saxer and René Grossenbacher (cf. 1987, p. 234) suggest the combination of methods, i. e., the utilisation of different methodological techniques should enable the researcher to verify his/her data. Consequently, the findings of the present study are based on a qualitative content analysis of a sample of 58 Tanzanian newspapers covering the period from 1888 to 1996, interviews with 27 of the country’s leading media professionals, and the extensive analysis of primary sources in the Tanzania National Archives (Dar es Salaam), the Public Record Office, and the Newspaper Library of the British Library (all in London). The secondary material used in this work was mainly found in the libraries of the TSJ in Dar es Salaam as well as in the London-based Institute of Commonwealth Studies (ICS) and the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS). In fact, this approach has resulted in a tight information-gaining process.

4 The Press of German East Africa