A literature review by Irene Neverla, Judith Lohner and Sandra Banjac on journalistic ethics and practices is now available.

Download at: http://www.mecodem.eu/publications/working-papers

Executive Summary

The paper provides a critical review of literature on journalism in conflict societies (‘conflict journalism’), by investigating principal theories, concepts and arguments, as well as empirical research findings concerning journalism and its role in democratisation processes and conflicts. Against the background of MeCoDEM Work Package 4 (“Journalistic ethics and practices”), the paper focusses on journalistic actors and their journalistic work practices, role perceptions and ethical orientations. The following overall observations can be summarized from the literature review:

• Journalism can be defined as a social institution with the function to observe society and its various fields, selecting and providing topics for debate and decision-making by the wider public. Certain interrelated constituents inform journalistic performance and journalism culture: work practices, role perceptions, ethical orientations and structural conditions.
• Existing (comparative) research shows that journalistic practices, roles, ethical orientations and structural conditions are neither static nor globally uniform. Rather, the cultural, political and historical and economic contexts relevant to specific regions and countries have significant impact on journalists’ ethical orientations, role perceptions and work practices. Therefore journalism should be understood as one component in relation to many other societal components, as a relevant institution with a particular identity, logic of practices and ethics, but still embedded, dependent and limited within the societal context.
• Despite the rich findings in the research field on journalism, there is a lack of conceptualization and empirical investigations concerning the specific role of journalism and journalistic actors in democratisation conflicts. So far there is no elaborated theory on journalism in the context of conflict societies and transitional democracies. Only few empirical studies have focused on journalistic ethics and practices in democratisation processes and transitional countries.
• Due to a Western bias in journalism studies some areas of the world and non-western democracies remain either ignored or occupy a marginal position in comparative studies, and normative assumptions rooted in Western traditions remain largely unquestioned. What is needed therefore is a “dialogic” or “global approach” to journalism studies that would develop non-Western-biased concepts of journalism that extend beyond Western-grown models, incorporating valuable ideas and norms from both Western and non-Western traditions.

An outline of the research design and methodology of Media, Conflict and Democratisation (MeCoDEM) by Katrin Voltmer and Hendrik Kraetzschmar is now available.

Download at: http://www.mecodem.eu/publications/working-papers

Executive Summary
The project Media, Conflict and Democratisation (MeCoDEM) investigates the role of media and communication in processes of regime transformation from authoritarian rule to a more democratic order. This paper outlines the main conceptual considerations and the research design that are guiding the research programme of the project.

• Contrary to the common assumption that democracy provides mechanisms for peaceful conflict resolution, experience shows that many transitions to democracy are characterised by fierce conflicts and even violence. The research of MeCoDEM focuses on these democratisation conflicts, i.e. conflicts that are triggered by and accompany transitions to, or demands for, a more democratic form of government. These conflicts can be understood as communication events that crystallise around the interpretation of events, contested values and the legitimacy of power. We argue that the dynamics of democratisation conflicts and their ultimate outcomes are determined by the way in which they are communicated.
• With their agenda-setting power and their ability to create interpretive frames, the media are key players in transitional contestations. However, the media cannot be understood in isolation. Instead, they are part of a shared, but contested space of – both online and offline – public communication where a multitude of actors compete for attention and recognition: governments and political elites, citizens and civil society groups with different orientations and objectives. This paper presents a communication model of democratisation conflicts that incorporates these various elements.
• The research design of MeCoDEM follows a comparative, multiple case study approach. Research is carried out in four countries, each of which representing particular constellations in democratic development with far-reaching repercussions in their respective regions: Egypt, Kenya, Serbia and South Africa. In each of these countries we study three conflict cases that illuminate key dilemmas of democratic transition: (1) conflicts over citizenship and identity; (2) conflicts over the distribution and control of power and good governance; (3) elections and their potential of exacerbating existing frictions: (4) conflicts related to transitional justice and reconciliation.
• Overall, MeCoDEM contributes to existing knowledge by:
  o investigating the communicative dimension of democratisation conflicts, which has been largely overlooked in democratisation studies so far;
  o providing systematic empirical and comparative research data on the interplay between media and democratisation.

A literature review by Ines Drefs and Barbara Thomass on findings about media assistance organisations is now available.

Download at: http://www.mecodem.eu/publications/working-papers

Executive Summary
This literature review provides a systematic overview of findings on media assistance in the fields of journalism training, civil society support, and good governance. It covers both academic accounts as well as “grey literature” from media assistance organisations (MAOs), democracy development organisations (DDOs), or public bodies in order to shed light on approaches, goals, and measures in media development practice. The literature review identifies concrete reference points for future research activities towards developing an understanding of modern-day capacity building for journalists, activists and governments in conflict arenas.

• The reviewed literature differentiates between linear and relational approaches to development as regards overall trends in development cooperation. Today, conceptualisations of development as a linear process of cause and effect have widely been replaced by relational approaches which emphasize local expertise and the contexts and complexities of social change.
• The literature emphasizes the importance of accounting for specific needs when it comes to media assistance in conflict-ridden contexts. The reviewed recommendations boil down to establishing communication between different actors (such as oppositional players or media and public professionals) and to institutionalising this communication in the form of round-tables, press conferences, or other modi vivendi of dealing with one another in a democratic way.
• Two aspects are salient throughout the reviewed areas “journalism training”, “capacity building for civil society actors”, and “capacity building for political leaders”: The need for multi-stakeholder dialogue and an emphasis on creating awareness of the general value of communication.
• Differences across the reviewed areas seem rooted in the amount of practical experience gained so far with the respective group of beneficiaries. Future research is well-advised to adapt its focus accordingly. Examining “best practices” is especially relevant when it comes to journalism training. An understanding of support offered to activists can be gained by identifying specific challenges to civil society organisations. When it comes to capacity building for governments it seems especially informative to address the standing of improved communication skills within established training structures.

A literature review by Nebojša Vladisavljević on media framing of political conflict is now available.

Download at: http://www.mecodem.eu/publications/working-papers

Executive Summary

The paper provides a critical overview of the literature on media and conflict by focusing on the ways in which contemporary media frame different types of political conflict. It reveals a fractured field. There is an extensive literature on how media report on wars, on election campaigns and popular protest and social movements in western democracies, as well as some research on media coverage of violent conflicts in non-democratic regimes and democratising states, but there are only limited attempts to draw parallels between the media coverage of different kinds of conflicts and little cross-fertilisation of findings from the disparate literatures.

• Much of the literature discusses the ways in which western media frame foreign conflicts and domestic election campaigns and policy debates, while there is considerably less focus on the media framing of domestic conflicts in non-western settings, such as those that arise during and after transitions from non-democratic rule.
• Several authors claim that reliance on existing models of media and conflict in established western democracies may be misleading in the study of non-western, transitional settings. They therefore call for developing new theories that are more suitable to discern the role that media play in democratisation.
• In contrast, this paper identifies arguments and hypotheses from the existing literature for further exploration in the study of media framing of political conflicts – such as those on citizenship, elections, transitional justice and distribution of power – in transitions from authoritarian rule and in new democracies, which are at the centre of the MeCoDEM project.
• Media coverage of political conflict can only be understood in context. Several dimensions of
  the political context matter in this respect, such as regime type, international (foreign) or domestic perspectives, the degree of elite consensus, the degree of policy uncertainty, whether or not a conflict takes place within an institutionalised setting, and the stage of democratisation. Also, the literature suggests that media framing influences political outcomes, for example the decisions made by policy makers, the strategic choices of collective actors or popular responses to conflicts.

MeCoDEM will arrange several events throughout its project term to build bridges between research and practice. In dialogue with activists, journalists, policy makers, and media development professionals the project members will discuss their findings on communication dynamics between conflict parties and the use of information and communications technologies (ICTs) for conflict resolution. Heading these outreach activities are Barbara Thomass (Ruhr University Bochum), leader of work package “Impact and Dissemination”, and Christian Christiansen (Stockholm University), leader of work package “ICTs and Conflict”. The outreach dialogues are scheduled for 2016.

More info at: http://www.mecodem.eu/events/team-meetings/#stockholm

MeCoDEM was well represented at ECREA 2014 in Lisbon. In total, there were eight presentations by MeCoDEM researchers. In a special panel themed “Advancing theory and research on the role of journalism in war and conflict” Katrin Voltmer, Katy Parry, and Hendrik Kraetzschmar outlined MeCoDEM’s research program and Nebojša Vladisavljević offered preliminary findings on media representations of our Serbian conflict cases.

You can read the abstracts and presentation slides below:

Voltmer Parry Kraetzschmar_Communicating Democratisation Conflicts_Abstract Ecrea 2014

Vladisavljevic_Media Framing Serbia_Abstract Ecrea 2014