Development journalism revived: The case of Ethiopia more
by Terje Skjerdal
than once he has had the opportunity to get exclusive interviews with African state leaders at theairport. What emerges is a
symbiotic relationship between the state media and the bureaucracy. Itbecomes essential to ask how this condition affects issues of professional integrity. Indeed, the concerned reporter admits that journalistic integrity is under threat in the present media situation:
“In the government media it is not acceptable to write negative issues. Sometimes it’
s accepted, butnot widely. Of course there is a conflict with my journalism ethics.
There is a conflict in my mind”
(reporter, ENA, personal interview 4 December 2008).
Interestingly, however, the reporter considershis conflict of mind to be less important than national concerns. The reporter
believes that theunderprivileged economic condition of Ethiopia necessitates a different type of reporting than thatwhich
traditional Western journalism can provide. Comparing different journalism paradigms, heinfers:Some say watchdog journalism is good journalism. [...] In my view, development journalism isbetter. Ethiopia is a poor country. The government struggles to create a better country. [...]Ethiopia is different from Europe and America. We have to broadcast positive news to thepublic. The public wants that news. That is development journalism. Some of the peoplewant to hear political news. But the majority wants to hear positive, development news. And
that’
s what I want too. (Reporter, ENA, personal interview 4
that development journalism is in conflict withcertain other types of professional practice
, especially ‘watchdog’ and ‘investigative’ reporting.Several reporters conceptualize a ‘hybrid’ journalism
form, however, and suggest that borrowingelements from ‘universal’
professional frameworks would enhance Ethiopian
development journalism practice. Such a combination of critical journalism and development journalism has beenfound in other transitional societies as well, like Uganda (Mwesige 2004). One editor in
The EthiopianHerald
agrees that development journalism is needed in official
reporting, but he also emphasizesthe value of other journalism styles when he adds
: “I’m afraid t
hat development journalism will notget us where we should be. I hope development journalism will be combined with other types of journalism
–
liberal journalism. I want development journalism to be more liberal” (personal
interview 11 May 2010). His comment is typical of the discontent felt by many journalists as regardsthe current
condition for reporting in the Ethiopian state media. However, the comment also revealsthe vagueness that the journalists sense with development journalism. On the one hand, the practiceis perceived as responding appropriately to
social and economic challenges; on theother hand, it is perceived as a practice which significantly delimits
the media’s potential to operatefreely.
Concluding discussion
Journalists in the Ethiopian state media endorse the idea that the media should both cover andsupport development. In terms of role perception, the journalists view themselves as inherently partof the society which they report on, and they take for granted that a responsible media workershould also have the mind of a change agent. In practical terms, this means focusing on
positivedevelopment efforts, educating people, and generally supporting national interest. However, thisstudy has shown that it also means neglecting critical stories, avoiding oppositional voices, and hidinginformation from the public. The latter is not an exception, but belongs to the order of the day inofficial
reporting. Paradoxically, this strategy is both defended and disapproved by the journalists. Onthe one hand, they justify the negligence of critical reporting by maintaining that such
coveragemight do more harm than good to the nation. Central to this line of thought is the assumption thatthe society is not
prepared to deal with a high amount of negative stories because a suspectedconsequence is instability and uncertainty among people. On the other hand, journalists are criticalto what they regard as mounting politicization of reporting practices in the Ethiopian state mediafollowing the disputed 2005 elections. It has become increasingly difficult to distinguish
between journalistic decisions made on professional grounds and those made on political grounds.
10Alongside growing politicization of the Ethiopian state media, the authorities haveintroduced development journalism in
official media policy. The policy opposes both libertarian and –
even more so –
authoritarian media ideologies. Like Banda’s
(2007) PSB-inspired development journalism model, the
Ethiopian policy stresses that the media should accommodate the needs of thelocal community. However, while
Banda’s and
many earlier submissions of development journalismassume global media imbalances and the colonial legacy to be part of its raison d’être
, the Ethiopianpolicy emerges entirely from domestic concerns –
of which poverty is the most important condition.All the more striking is that the implementation of development journalism in Ethiopia appears torepeat some of the troubles of development journalism elsewhere. The concerns are mainly of threetypes. First, the ambiguity of development journalism is a persisting problem. In principle, theframework encourages both
promotional and investigative stories. In effect, however, journalistsperceive sympathetic reporting to be the only style accepted by the owner. Secondly, the policybecomes politicized on its way to the newsroom. As far as the journalists are
concerned, there areonly certain issues that are allowed to be reported on; only a certain form of language that isaccepted; and only certain sources that should be consulted
and they are all pro-government.Thirdly, and ironically, implementation of development journalism turns out to be marked by top-down directives rather than participation from below. This is in great contrast to old and newtheories of
development journalism (Domatob and Hall 1983; Banda 2007; Servaes 2009). In theEthiopian case, both the policy document and journalists speak warmly of the importance of people-driven journalism, but ultimately, it is leaders and managers who frame the nature and extent of such participation. Broadcasting
journalists disclose how they pretend to care for public participationin the programmes by including a majority of voices which support
the government’s caus
e, whilesupplementing with a few dissident voices for the sake of credibility.Of course, these critical remarks to development journalism could be dismissed by arguingthat the policy is not yet fully implemented in the Ethiopian media. And rightly, both practitionersand managers in the media organizations admit that there are deficiencies to be dealt with. Mediaveteran Kefyalew Azeze, one of the minds behind the Ethiopian development journalism policydocument, observes:
“
There are some examples of good journalism in our
organizations, but onlysporadic. [...] There is a slow process in the development of journalism in this country. The laws arevery progressive, but not the p
ractice” (personal interview
17 November 2009). The politicalleadership is therefore humble in its portrayal of the performance in the media organizations. Areorientation to development journalism philosophy is
Ethiopian authorities. However, it is fair to suggest that the elasticity entailed inthe development journalism paradigm is hardly conducive for a potential break with the
traditionallypoliticized character of the Ethiopian state media. On the contrary, the chequered history of development
journalism worldwide shows that the paradigm has commonly been used to validatemedia support for the political ideas of the government.On this basis, it might seem that development
journalism must be scrapped altogether as amodel for professional media practice in a transitional society like
Ethiopia. However, that is notentirely the thesis here. Rather, a society in transition has challenges that are unlikely to be fixed byembracing a libertarian media system alone. A media structure solely built on commercial principleswould hardly give proper attention to issues of social and national importance, nor is the economicbase in such societies strong enough for creating a competitive media market. Therefore, in light of the present study of the Ethiopian media, there seems to be no single media or journalism modelthat is likely to resolve the diverse
challenges of a transitional media society. Instead, a
combinationof models should be considered. To the extent development journalism is applied as one of theapproaches, particular attention must be paid to avoid problems of
politicization in reporting and tosecure overall media freedom. Acknowledgements
11I am greatly indebted to Woldegiorgis Ghebrehiwot who translated the Ethiopian policy document ondevelopment
journalism from Amharic to English. I also thank Birhanu Olana and prof. Helge Rønningfor constructive comments on a
Endnote
