Homework answers / question archive / Communication for Development Thank you for choosing a SAGE product! If you have any comment, observation or feedback, I would like to personally hear from you

Communication for Development Thank you for choosing a SAGE product! If you have any comment, observation or feedback, I would like to personally hear from you

Communications

Share With

Communication for Development Thank you for choosing a SAGE product! If you have any comment, observation or feedback, I would like to personally hear from you. Please write to me at contactceo@sagepub.in Vivek Mehra, Managing Director and CEO, SAGE India. Bulk Sales SAGE India offers special discounts for purchase of books in bulk. We also make available special imprints and excerpts from our books on demand. For orders and enquiries, write to us at Marketing Department SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd B1/I-1, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area Mathura Road, Post Bag 7 New Delhi 110044, India E-mail us at marketing@sagepub.in Get to know more about SAGE Be invited to SAGE events, get on our mailing list. Write today to marketing@sagepub.in This book is also available as an e-book. Communication for Development Theory and Practice for Empowerment and Social Justice 3rd Edition Srinivas Raj Melkote H. Leslie Steeves Copyright © Srinivas Raj Melkote and H. Leslie Steeves, 2015 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. 1st edition published in 1991 as Communication for Development in the Third World: Theory and Practice 2nd edition published in 2001 as Communication for Development in the Third World: Theory and Practice for Empowerment 3rd edition published in 2015 as Communication for Development: Theory and Practice for Empowerment and Social Justice by SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd B1/I-1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044, India www.sagepub.in SAGE Publications Inc 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, California 91320, USA SAGE Publications Ltd 1 Oliver’s Yard, 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP, United Kingdom SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte Ltd 3 Church Street #10-04 Samsung Hub Singapore 049483 Published by Vivek Mehra for SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd, typeset at 10.5/12.5 pt Minion Pro by Diligent Typesetter, Delhi and printed at Chaman Enterprises, New Delhi. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Melkote, Srinivas R., 1952– [Communication for development in the Third World] Communication for development : theory and practice for empowerment and social justice / Srinivas Raj Melkote and H. Leslie Steeves.—3rd edition.   pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Communication in economic development—Developing countries. 2. Developing countries—Economic policy. I. Steeves, H. Leslie. II. Title. HD76.M45  338.9009172’4—dc23  2015  2015022366 ISBN: 978-93-515-0257-9 (PB) The SAGE Team: Shambhu Sahu, Neha Sharma, Rajib Chatterjee, and Rajinder Kaur CONTENTS List of Tables List of Figures List of Photographs List of Boxes List of Abbreviations Foreword by Late Dr Luis Ramiro Beltran Salmon Preface Part I ix xi xiii xv xvii xxi xxiii Introduction and Overview 1. Development Communication, Empowerment, and Social Justice in the Globalization Epoch Media and Communication Development and Directed Change Empowerment Social Justice Development Communication Third World Globalization Conclusion Organization of the Book 2. Evolution of Devcom for Development and Social Justice Evolution of the Theory and Practice of Devcom Communication and Development for Social Justice in the 21st Century Conclusion 3 7 15 17 19 21 24 33 36 36 40 41 58 74 Part II Development Discourse, Modernization Theory, and Devcom 3. Modernization, Globalization, and the Dominant Development Discourse Modernization as an Economic Model Modernization as Social Evolution 79 83 87 vi COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT Modernization as Individual Change Modernization as Discourse Globalization Conclusion 4. Media and Communication in Modernization and Globalization Communication Effects Approach Mass Media and Modernization Approach Diffusion of Innovations Research Social Marketing Family Planning and HIV/AIDS Communication Campaigns Media and Communication under Globalization Conclusion 93 98 107 120 122 123 132 137 142 151 159 176 Part III Critical Perspectives on Communication and Development 5. 6. Deconstructing the Dominant Development Paradigm Biases of the Dominant Development Paradigm Critique of the Economic Models Sociological and Psychosocial Models Revisited Gender and Environmental Biases in Modernization Discourse Alternative Perspectives of Development and Social Change Conclusion Critique of Devcom in the Dominant Paradigm Critique of Mass Media under Modernization Critique of Diffusion of Innovations Research and Practice Critical Appraisal of Campaigns in Strategic Social Change New Roles for Devcom Digital Communication Technologies for Development Conclusion 181 182 187 204 213 228 236 240 241 255 271 280 287 300 CONTENTS vii Part IV Liberation Perspectives and Practices in Development 7. 8. Liberation Theology and Development Religious Bias in the Dominant Development Paradigm Jewish Liberation Theology Christian Liberation Theology Islam and Liberation Gandhian Liberation Theology Buddhism and Liberation Liberation Theology and Marxism Forming Alliances Conclusion Communication and Spirituality in Development Paolo Freire and Liberation Theology Base Ecclesial Community Movement in Brazil Sarvodaya Shramadana Movement in Sri Lanka Muslims’ Roles in United Nations Population Fund Projects in Ghana Conclusion 305 307 313 314 317 319 323 325 328 329 333 334 338 343 354 362 Part V Participatory and Empowerment Paradigms for Social Justice 9. Participatory Paradigm in Development Participatory Strategies in Directed Social Change Participatory Communication Processes and Strategies Communication Models in Directed Change Programs Enhanced Role for Devcom Conclusion 10. Media and Communication for Empowerment Communication for Empowerment Niche for DSC Professionals in the Empowerment Model Conclusion 11. Devcom for Empowerment and Social Justice Critical Development Study Alternatives to the Neoliberal Model of Directed Change 369 370 380 388 400 407 410 411 429 432 434 434 440 viii COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT Devcom for Social Justice in Directed Change: A Conceptual Framework Conclusion Postscript Appendices Appendix A: Historical Overview of Development/ Underdevelopment Appendix B: Highlights of Media, Communication, and Development Activities since World War II Bibliography Index About the Authors 455 459 460 462 462 464 478 526 536 LIST OF TABLES 2.1 Reappraisal of the Role of Development Support Communication for Social Justice 3.1 Dualisms between Traditionalism and Modernity 4.1 Popular Entertainment–Education Programs in the Third World 4.2 Stage Models in Behavior Change 4.3 Frequently Used Theories of Human Behavior 5.1 Comparison of Two Political–Economic Systems of Development: Keynesianism versus Neoliberalism 9.1 Taxonomies of Participation Models 9.2 Organic and Mechanistic Models for Research and Policy 9.3 Ontological, Epistemological, and Methodological Differences between Modernization and Participatory Frameworks 9.4 Differences between Behavior Change Communication Models and Communication for Social Change Models 9.5 Phases in FAO’s Communication for Development Program 9.6 Johari Window: Operational Model for Dialogic Communication 9.7 Comparison of Participatory Rural Communication Appraisal and Participatory Rural Appraisal Methods 10.1 Communication for Change within Empowerment and Modernization Paradigms 66 90 147 154 160 191 375 376 382 383 391 392 393 412 LIST OF FIGURES 1.1 World Map: Mercator Projection Comparing the North and South 1.2 World Map: Mercator Projection Comparing Europe and South America 1.3 World Map: Mercator Projection Comparing North America and Africa 1.4 World Map: Peters Projection 1.5 Upside-Down World Map Projection 2.1 Pro-Persuasion Model of Development 2.2 Change Agency Communication and Mass Media Model for Development 3.1 Representation of Harvey’s (1989) Shrinking of Space by Time by Speedier Transportation 3.2 Historical Context of Globalization 4.1 Graphic Presentation of Lasswell’s Formula 4.2 Models Denoting Powerful Effects of Mass Media 4.3 One-way, Linear Model of Communication 4.4 Berlo’s Formula for the Process of Communication 4.5 Two-step Flow Model of Communication Effects 4.6 Rings of Defense of Receivers 4.7 Marketing and Agricultural Extension Models 4.8 Cumulative S-shaped Curve of Diffusion 4.9 Bell-shaped Normal Curve 5.1 Relation between GNP and Income Inequality (Gini Curve) 6.1 Constraints in the Use of ICT-based Information by the Poor 9.1 Participation Matrix in a Model for Participatory Knowledge-sharing 26 27 28 29 30 51 53 117 120 124 125 126 127 128 129 131 140 141 189 296 386 xii COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 10.1 11.1 11.2 11.3 The Problem/Solution Tree WOPS: Two Versions in an Irrigation Project Methodological Framework and Communication Model in World Bank’s Devcom Projects Devcom in Development Project Support Operations Westley and MacLean’s Model of Communication Role of Devcom Personnel in Participatory Communication Praxis in Participatory Action Research Top 1 percent Income Share Dimensions of Political Actions in Directed Change Devcom for Social Justice in Directed Change: The POD Framework 395 396 398 402 404 405 421 436 439 457 LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS 2.1 4.1 4.2 5.1 5.2 6.1 7.1 8.1 Akasombo Dam Village Loudspeakers Nike Fishing Boat Women Selling Mobile Phones E-waste Cell Phone Towers Mahatma Gandhi Paolo Freire 48 136 164 214 224 293 320 334 LIST OF BOXES 1.1 3.1 4.1 5.1 5.2 6.1 11.1 11.2 Bits and Bytes Mundane Deterritorialization Al Jazeera Washington Consensus Eat Less Meat? ICTs and M-Health Innovations Snapshot of the World Economic Forum, 2014 Crowd Sourcing 2.0 10 112 172 199 221 294 442 453 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ACPC AIDS APC ARRM ATTAC Action for Cultural and Political Change (India) Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome Association for Progressive Communications AIDS Risk Reduction and Management Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions and Aid to Citizens CBA Communication-Based Assessment CEB Base Ecclesial Community CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women CIA Central Intelligence Agency CNA Communication Needs Assessment COMOG Coalition of Muslim Organizations of Ghana CPR Contraceptive Prevalence Rate DAC Development Assistance Committee DAN Direct Action Network DEVCOM Development Communication DSC Development Support Communication EE Entertainment–Education EATWOT The Ecumenical Association of Third World Theologians FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FOMWAG Federation of Muslim Women’s Associations of Ghana FOSS Free and Open-Source Software FTAA Free Trade Area of the Americas G8 Group of Eight GAD Gender and Development GDI Gender-Related Development Index GEM Gender Empowerment Measure GDP Gross Domestic Product GNP Gross National Product HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade xviii COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT HBM HDI HPI IBRD ICANN ICT ICT4D ICT4AD ILO IMF IT ITU LETS MAB MAI MDG MSA MPI NACO NGO NAFTA ODA OECD OLPC PAR PCS PD PLA POD PQLI PRA PRCA PGA RRA Health Belief Model Human Development Index Human Poverty Index International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Information and Communication Technology Information and Communication Technology for Development Information and Communication Technology for Accelerated Development International Labor Organization International Monetary Fund Information Technology International Telecommunications Union Local exchange and trading systems Movement of People Affected by Dams (Brazil) Multilateral Agreement on Investment Millennium Development Goals Mutual Security Administration Multidimensional Poverty Index National AIDS Control Organization (India) Nongovernmental Organization North American Free Trade Agreement Organized Development Assistance Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development One Laptop Per Child Participatory Action Research Population Communication Services Positive Deviance Participatory Learning and Action Acronym for model in Chapter 11 (Figure 11.3) Physical Quality of Life Index Participatory Rural Appraisal Participatory Rural Communication Appraisal People’s Global Action Rapid Rural Appraisal LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xix SAF SAP SDD SEEDS SES SITE SOPA SWM T&V TAZ TCA UAR UN UNAIDS UNCTAD UNDP UNESCO UNRRA UNFPA UNICEF UK US USAID WB WEF WOPS WCC WHO WID WSF WSIS WTO Situation Analysis Framework Structural Adjustment Policies Song and Drama Division (Ministry of Information, India) Sarvodaya Economic Enterprise Development Services Socioeconomic Status Satellite Instructional Television Experiment Stop Online Piracy Act Sarvodaya Women’s Movement Training and Visit Temporary Autonomous Zones Technical Cooperation Administration United Arab Republic United Nations Joint United Nations Program on HIV and AIDS United Nations Conference on Trade and Development United Nations Development Program United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration United Nations Population Fund United Nations Children’s Fund United Kingdom United States United States Agency for International Development World Bank World Economic Forum Windows of Perceptions World Council of Churches World Health Organization Women in Development World Social Forum World Summit on Information Society World Trade Organization FOREWORD I regard Communication and Development for Empowerment and Social Justice clearly as one of the very best pieces of the world’s literature on this discipline. It is an extraordinary work in both historical and conceptual terms. In fact, it is a thorough and penetrating overview of the evolution of this discipline in terms of theory and practice as well as an overall reflection in-depth about the nature of it. The account deals with the different propositions about development, and about communication and development for social justice and empowerment. It does so critically, comparatively, and creatively, paying special attention to the transition from the classical and dominant paradigms to the innovative models that emerged after several years in some countries of what used to be called the Third World. The book begins with an illuminating discussion of key concepts of the trade carried out with plausible insight, equanimity, and rigor. And it culminates in a very valuable proposal for reconceptualizing the role of development support communication with emphasis on empowering the people so as to democratize communication as well as development. As if these merits were not enough, Melkote and Steeves write in plain language and present their descriptions and conclusions in a very well-documented and most orderly configuration. This book, I honestly feel, is a sort of the Bible of the profession. It should be in the hands of every student of development communication (devcom) all over the world. I hope it is translated into many languages, starting with Spanish. Let me, thus, reiterate now my congratulations and express my admiration and affection. Late Dr Luis Ramiro Beltran Salmon Journalist and Communication Theorist La Paz, Bolivia PREFACE T he third edition of this book builds on the two previous editions in our efforts to trace the history of devcom theory and practice, present diverse approaches and their proponents, critique these approaches as appropriate, and provide ideas and models for devcom in the 21st century. The book is divided into five parts. As in the second edition, this edition is organized conceptually versus historically. However, we provide historic context for each concept, and additionally present a historical map for the volume in Part I of the book. Part I also defines key terms, such as communication, development, empowerment, and social justice. We explain our understanding of the term Third World and our decision to drop the term from the title. We also discuss our emphasis on development for social justice, as well as on ways in which globalization is changing the entire dialogue—for example, by radically altering global realities of time, place, proximity, and markets. As in the second edition of the book, Parts II, III, and IV each introduce a major set of assumptions regarding development and communication therein: modernization and globalization (Part II), critical perspectives (Part III), and liberation perspectives (Part IV). We conclude with three chapters in Part V: one synthesizing key perspectives on the participatory paradigm and its vision for development and social change, one on communication for empowerment, and a final chapter that presents our framework foregrounding empowerment and social justice as goals for devcom in the 21st century. The book has been updated to include much of the scholarship and practice on communication for development, social change, and social justice since our second edition. Many excellent articles, books, and anthologies have been published since the second edition, and it is impossible to include everything within our space limitations. We have done our best to trace key themes over the past 14 years, while advancing our arguments. We know we have undoubtedly failed to acknowledge all colleagues who have contributed importantly to this dialogue, and we apologize for these omissions. xxiv COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT As before, underlying goals throughout include: critiquing the power of dominant knowledge systems, challenging the truth claims of modernism, and sensitizing the reader to the relationship between dominant knowledge and the exercise of social power. We identify and critique interventions and practices that have been promoted by modernist discourses, and analyze their political, economic, and cultural origins and consequences. We examine the local and other contexts and assert the heuristic value of alternative, non-Western, local experiences and knowledge systems to the tasks of social change. We are honored and humbled that a luminary in the field of devcom, Late Dr Luis Ramiro Beltran Salmon, has written the foreword to the present edition. We are thankful to many colleagues, former students, and collaborators over the years for their help and encouragement. They include: Sidick Ahmed Abubakari, Robert Agunga, Kwesi Ansu-Kyeremeh, Alan Brody, Audrey Gadzekpo, Ab Gratama, Ammina Kothari, Twange Kasoma, Janet Kwami, Gabriela Martinez, Sundeep Muppidi, Radhika Parameswaran, Fay Patel, Luz Estella Porras, Kumarini Silva, Arvind Singhal, Archie Smith, Jr, Prahalad Sooknanan, Fatoumata Sow, Sanjanthi Velu, Karin Wilkins, and Nancy Worthington. Our current students who have contributed ideas and assistance include: Irma Jolene Fisher, Senyo Ofori-Parku, Brenna Wolf-Monteiro, Tewodros Workneh, and Arpan Yagnik. We are indebted to them. Significantly, we are grateful to the late Professor Everett Rogers, who wrote the foreword to Melkote’s (1991) first edition, and Professor Bella Mody, who likewise wrote the foreword to Melkote and Steeves’ (2001) second edition, and provided helpful comments. We acknowledge our common mentor, Professor Joseph Ascroft. We met Joe at the University of Iowa in the early 1980s, and were changed forever by his powerful stories from the field, where he observed firsthand the many failures of top–down message strategies. Joe Ascroft was born in Malawi, lived in Zimbabwe, attended college in South Africa during the Apartheid, and eventually earned his Ph.D. at Michigan State University. These experiences sensitized him to both the realities of oppression and the many blind spots in theory and practice intended to help, subsequently shaping his approach to teaching, writing, and consulting globally. Joe is a gifted and inspirational teacher, and his most fundamental lessons live on in this volume. PREFACE xxv Finally, we thank our readers. Over the years, we have received much support and encouragement from our readers globally. We hope you like the new edition and find it useful. That will give us ultimate satisfaction. Srinivas Raj Melkote H. Leslie Steeves I INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW CHAPTER 1 DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE IN THE GLOBALIZATION EPOCH A way has to be found to enable everyone to benefit from the fruits of the earth, and not simply to close the gap between the affluent and those who must be satisfied with the crumbs falling from the table, but above all to satisfy the demands of justice, fairness and respect for every human being. Pope Francis, Address to the Food and Agriculture Organization (June 20, 2013) O ur world bears little resemblance to the 1940s when institutional development plans and strategies were first executed. Today, themes such as diversity, digital divide, human welfare, community-oriented participatory initiatives, social justice, and transparent modes of collective action reflect the new priorities. New global and local political and developmental realities demand new institutional arrangements based on 21st century conditions and priorities. The legitimacy of the modernization paradigm of development is being challenged on several fronts, including critiques of their scientific and economic foundations, challenges by fundamentalist religious movements, and postmodern, poststructuralist, environmental, antiglobalization, and feminist revolts. Fundamentalist religious movements are questioning the validity of Western modernity and advocating a return to their vision of a good society, while postmodernists, poststructuralists, feminists, and other critics point to significant problems with the meta-discourse on development currently in vogue. The second half of the 20th century brought a tradition of communication research and practice geared toward Third World 4 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT development needs, an area known as development communication (devcom). Research and projects addressing devcom flourished during the First Development Decade in the 1960s. The works of Daniel Lerner (1958), Wilbur Schramm (1964), Everett Rogers (1962), Everett Rogers and Svenning (1969), and many others, such as Fredrick Frey (1973), Lucien Pye (1963), and Lakshmana Rao (1963), attest to this lively interest. Since the 1970s, Western development aid and all facets of the process, including communication, were challenged. Many large and expensive projects promoting directed social change have failed to help their intended recipients, or have resulted in further worsened conditions for them. Development’s primary focus on economic growth has ignored other crucial, nonmaterial aspects of human need. Further, economic development aid has often contributed to corruption and large gaps between the wealthy elite and the masses in most countries. Charges of gender bias, ethnocentrism, and even racism abound in the literature of development studies and devcom. Most commonly, the discourse of development reveals a single story of poverty and disaster, positioning development recipients as victims and Western aid workers as saviors. Nigerian novelist Adichie (2009) argues powerfully that this single story engenders a flattening of experience by hiding the complexity of life in much of the world. Scholars have increasingly debated the value, purpose, and meaning of communication for development, debates which certainly parallel those on development itself. Our book explores the scholarship and practice of media and communication for development, social justice, and the empowerment of individuals and communities around the globe, especially in a context of increasing globalization. Though perspectives on the role of communication in development have evolved considerably since the 1950s and 1960s, the need for devcom remains important. This book will trace the history of devcom, present diverse approaches and their proponents, critique these approaches as appropriate, and provide ideas and models for devcom in the early phase of the 21st century. We will critically examine the modernization paradigm that has guided much of development theory and practice since World War II. Our interest in examining various theoretical perspectives on development is to identify and critique interventions and practices that have emerged from them and analyze their social, political, economic, and cultural consequences. DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 5 An underlying goal throughout the book is to critique dominant systems of knowledge, question the truth claims of modernism, and sensitize the reader to the relationship between dominant knowledge and the exercise of social power. In this approach, we are informed by the work of poststructuralist, postmodern, feminist, and postcolonial scholars. We assert the heuristic value of alternative, local, and non-Western experiences and knowledge systems to the tasks of social change, and, therefore, reject the notion that development and change must flow from the North or from nonlocal experts. Local knowledge and experiences may not only be practical in solving local problems, but will also resuscitate these subjugated knowledge systems and empower marginalized groups and individuals. In fact, local knowledge is essential for the success of self-reliant and autonomous self-development activities. Our approach is interdisciplinary. We recognize that the scholarship and practice of devcom has many disciplinary origins besides communication studies: political science, economics, sociology, social psychology, social work, education, women’s and gender studies, postcolonial studies, community psychology, community organization, international/global policy studies, geographic area studies, and more. We aim to synthesize the material and present it in a conceptually organized manner by reducing disciplinary jargon. In terms of limitations, we examine the role and place of devcom at micro levels of the individual and communities. We recognize that development and change also requires changes at the macro levels of national governments and global institutions. However, due to considerations of space, a detailed discussion of macro-level policy-making structures is beyond the scope of this book. Our exploration of this field cannot begin without first clarifying understandings of key concepts, and how these meanings compare and contrast with how others use and define them. The most obvious are the five concepts in the title of the book and this chapter, that is, communication, development, social justice, empowerment, and globalization. Combinations of these four yield additional terms, concepts, and accompanying controversies as well. An understanding of devcom varies not only with definitions of the terms that comprise it, but also is complicated by assumptions about related areas of study and practice. These include development education, development journalism, international communication, 6 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT globalization, transnational communication, international journalism, cross-cultural and intercultural communication. Most scholars and professionals readily agree that devcom is concerned with the role of media and communication in directed social change, but so are all of these other fields. Generally, each of these areas connotes differences in focus, emphasis, and scope, but these differences must be explicated in each instance. Terminology is a problem within the rubric of devcom and related areas, and varies enormously between texts. Distinctions made between devcom and development support communication (DSC) constitute one example.1 Other areas of continued contradiction and confusion include the distinction between devcom and communication development, and the meaning of participatory communication.2 The definition and boundaries of these interdisciplinary areas have become even more fluid and nebulous in the past decade. The end of the Cold War, alongside greater polarization along ethnic, religious, and nationalistic lines, increased globalization, growing consciousness of marginalized groups, and diminishing resources, has challenged and changed the issues and questions. Throughout this volume, beginning here, we attempt to untangle the contested and overlapping meanings of these and other terms, and the areas of study and practice they signify. At the same time, we argue for the integrity and value of devcom. We agree that old views of the field are no longer appropriate. Yet, as long as development projects are carried out, devcom will take place. Development policies and projects continue to be important at the global, national, and local levels. Organizations such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the World Bank (WB), and several private foundations including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation set aside billions of dollars for development assistance, mostly to poor countries and regions (Mefalopulos, 2008). Therefore, planned yet self-reflexive communication, accounting for mistakes of the past, will remain crucial to the relative success—and ongoing transformation—of development. While development projects constitute an integral part of directed change efforts, we wish to emphasize that all aspects of directed change do not necessarily fit within the narrow definitions of development as operationalized in projects until now. The new challenges and DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 7 opportunities presented to us in the globalization epoch call for other potential areas, principles, and activities for remaking our world. We will group these ideas under the rubric of post-development for a detailed discussion and critique in the final chapter. Next, we introduce concepts central to this edition of our book: communication, development, empowerment, social justice, devcom, Third World (and variants), and globalization. In later chapters, we will further historicize and explicate these and other terms as we argue for our vision of communication and development for empowerment and social justice. Media and Communication Issues of words and language are certainly issues of communication. As mass communication spread in the early 20th century, the potential increased for terms such as development, underdevelopment, and the Third World to be globally transmitted and legitimized. Scholars increasingly questioned the influence and potential of media and communication to effect change—both in individuals and in society. These questions led to a plethora of media and communication models and accompanying assumptions and theories about the components of the process, the process itself, and the context in which communication takes place, as different communication contexts have yielded their own subfields of communication studies. The earliest models of communication described or assumed a relatively linear process whereby someone sends a message to someone else via a channel and receives a response, called feedback. Interference in the process—whether psychological or environmental—was often called noise. This exchange process can occur on a more or less equal basis between the sender and receiver. When the initiative and ability lie overwhelmingly with the sender, the result is an impersonal, one-way flow of information. Of course, this is the case often with the traditional models and processes of mass communication, where media create and send messages with few opportunities for feedback from audience members and seldom via the same channels.3 8 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT Given the sheer volume of information transmitted by mass media and the broad audience access that they enjoy in every society, especially in societies with market economies, early theories assumed that mass media have considerable power to inform and influence. This early model of information-based processes has been termed as the transmission approach. Much has happened since these early models and theories of communication were developed. Empirical research revealed flaws, pointing to the need for considerable refinement to account for differences in contexts and audience demographics. Additionally, significant advances have been made in media and communication technologies, resulting in rapid increases in information flows globally. Radio and television stations have multiplied exponentially. The Internet is revolutionizing our home and work environments, along with smartphones, tablet computers, and other mobile communication technologies. In the contemporary world, the audience is less passive than depicted in the earlier models and processes. Users now have the ability and opportunities to send their own messages using vehicles such as Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, and blogs, thus, communicating instantly to other users globally. Several recent global events have demonstrated that ordinary people can be global media makers, gathering and disseminating information as first responders. The empowered roles of many users/consumers globally are reflected in new terms used to describe them, such as produser or prosumer. All this has been largely a result of the convergence of technological inventions: (a) computers and smart machines, which provide information-storage and data-transfer capacities previously unknown; (b) communication satellites, cell phone towers, and fiber optic broadband networks, which relay information over vast distances quickly; and (c) digitization, which converts any kind of communication/information data—pictures, sound, graphics, text—to a binary code that can be readily transmitted, decoded, and delivered to the intended individual or audience. Social networks such as Facebook are creating their own islands of virtual information, communication, and fellowship. Data from the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) show the dramatic increase in Internet users, mobile telephone subscriptions, mobile broadband connections, and bandwidth capacity that are crucial for high-speed Internet (ITU, 2011, 2013): DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 9 • Mobile cellular telephone subscriptions around the globe have reached nearly 6.8 billion with a penetration rate of nearly 100 percent by 2013. • Between the years of 2006 and 2013, Internet access has gone from 360 to 749 million homes among the nearly 1.8 billion households worldwide. • Internet users increased from 1.15 to 2.27 billion between 2006 and 2011, an increase of nearly 97 percent. • Mobile broadband subscriptions around the globe rose from around 268 million to over 2 billion between 2007 and 2013. • Internet bandwidth, a key factor for high-speed Internet, grew from 11,000 Gbits in 2006 to 80,000 Gbits in 2011. Social scientists interested in questions of message transfer and effects have developed newer theories to address problems with the early theories, and to account for the increased complexity of the media environment (McQuail, 1994, 2010). Digital technologies have inspired new and more elaborate arguments about the power of these technologies to deliver information, set agendas, persuade, socialize, educate, satisfy myriad audience needs, and democratize societies. The excitement among media and communication scholars and practitioners about the role and effects of information and communication technologies (ICTs) is palpable. Terms such as weightless economics, which denotes the effortless movement of bytes of information via digital networks, are bandied about, and digital communication technologies are seen as iconic representations of globalization (Barker, 1999; Waters, 1995). The nature of digital media and communication products is such that they can be easily carried and circulated globally through digital networks (see Box 1.1). Sparks (2007: 133) suggests that “to the extent that globalization is constituted in and through networks and the resulting circulation of symbols rather than things, then the immateriality of media products are emblematic of the process of globalization.” All of these claims show that processes of contemporary globalization are traceable to media and communication technologies. Waters’ (1995: 9) theorem deserves a mention in this context: “material exchanges localize, political exchanges internationalize, and symbolic exchanges globalize.” Since media and communication products can be easily 10 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT Box 1.1 Bits and Bytes Digitization represents the process by which information and media messages are converted to a computer-readable form. Computers and smart machines communicate with each other in a binary digit code or bit. A bit is represented by either a 1 or 0. Eight bits comprise a byte. Each letter in English is one byte. The letter “A” is represented in machine language as “01000001.” Similarly, every digital word, picture, audio, or movie may be represented by a string of ones and zeros. Computers can process this information rapidly making no difference between a video or a text message, except that each of them takes up different amounts of memory in the computer. Here is handy information about bits and bytes: • • • • • • • Byte Kilobyte (KB) Megabyte (MB) Gigabyte (GB) Terabyte (TB) Petabyte (PB) Exabyte (EB) = = = = = = = 8 bits 1,024 bytes 1,024 KB 1,024 MB 1,024 GB 1,024 TB 1,024 PB Source: Compiled from Pavlik and McIntosh (2011). symbolized, it follows that they are symptomatic of globalization. Just as the mass media were considered agents and indices of modernization in an earlier era (Lerner, 1958; Schramm, 1964), digital media now serve as agents and indices of globalization. Instrumental versus Culture-centric Symbolization The swashbuckling generalizations about the globalizing tendencies of digital media and communication technologies described above need closer scrutiny (Tomlinson, 1999: 23). Such data transmissions DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 11 are emblematic of instrumental symbolization, and describe pure information exchange for instrumental purposes. We recognize that instrumental symbolization via ICTs is ubiquitous and is important in fostering global connectivity. The exchange and circulation of data by banks of financial information, or the sending and receiving of intelligence information pertaining to national security issues and other global transactions are important for certain sectors in our societies. But, data exchanges alone do not constitute communication (Pasquali, 2006); as such, they do not constitute the subject matter for this book. An important objective in this book is to examine the role of culturecentric symbolization through media and communication channels and networks to influence culture or to facilitate greater cultural and social interactions globally. We consider culture as “the social production of existentially significant meaning” (Tomlinson, 1999: 21), and we further assume that cultural processes and institutions are enmeshed with and mutually constitutive of economic and political processes and institutions (Althusser, 1971). Therefore, we wish to focus on the role of media and communication messages, technologies, and networks in cultural as well as economic and political change. In other words, how do media, information, and communication products and actions in one context or locale have influence and consequences in terms of significant meaning construction in other contexts or locales? We will examine these issues further in this book. Critical Communication Scholarship At the same time that social scientists have been analyzing mass media’s effects, critical scholars have challenged the relatively linear nature of the models and their isolation from entwined economic, political, and ideological processes in their societies (Sparks, 2007). These scholars assume links between culture and communication in the idea of communication as shared meaning, versus information transmission or persuasion (Carey, 1989). Communication contributes to the maintenance, modification, and creation of culture. This has been termed as the ritual view of communication. In this sense, the processes and institutions of communication, culture, and development are all inter-woven. Therefore, it becomes impossible to 12 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT think of communication as predominantly a process of information transmission. Because of the assumed inseparability of culture and communication, many critical scholars argue that communication reinforces hegemonic values and priorities in society. We accept Gramsci’s (1971) conceptualization of hegemony as the cultural production of a society’s values and beliefs by the state and other institutional structures that pervade all areas of daily life such that they appear as logical and plain common sense. Hegemonic processes socialize people to have imaginary relations with aspects of reality (Althusser, 1971). Hegemony is assumed to be subtle and seductive, such that most audience members do not resist the values embedded in messages; in fact, they actively accept them. The fact that hegemony allows the mainstream transmission of some alternative perspectives gives an illusion of balance, even though only selected nonmainstream messages are allowed, messages that can be most easily co-opted by the dominant system. Hence, a major focus of much critical work is to carry out textual analyses that expose the dominant and resistant values embedded in media content, based on the assumption that exposure alone provides an important consciousness-raising function that may challenge hegemony. There are many textual conventions supported by standard traditions and values of media practice that powerful groups use to reinforce dominant messages. These include, for instance, trivializing nonmainstream views; undercounting those with alternative views; overemphasizing support for mainstream views; creating media and cultural myths by actively framing events or personalities into stories that create an enduring feeling and shared history, thus, often creating pseudoevents; and an over-reliance on official government and corporate sources. Media traditions that reinforce these conventions include focusing on events rather than on the process or context, on conflict versus consensus, and on individual freedoms rather than on group responsibilities. Additionally, economic motives, deadlines, and competition between journalists contribute to what gets in the media and how it gets represented.4 One key tool on which we will briefly elaborate is language and the selection of labels that support hegemonic agendas. Several prominent critical theorists and philosophers have developed arguments about the power of the dominant discourse to shape society DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 13 and in fact create reality (Foucault, 1972; Gramsci, 1971). There are numerous historic examples of this. For instance, in missionary and colonial times, all African people were classified into tribes headed by chiefs regardless of the hierarchical or egalitarian nature of the group (Staudt, 1991: 12). This established linguistic relationships of superiority and inferiority consistent with the values and style of Europeans. In contemporary society, the power of language is evident when policy or public relations decisions about word choices outweigh accuracy, as in the initial refusal of the United States (US) to use the word genocide for the 1994 Rwandan slaughter of Tutsis by Hutus. A careful examination of the language and imagery of development certainly provides insights into values and agendas of those communicating. Take the word underdeveloped. Suppose instead that the term overexploited is used. The meaning changes immediately in a way that may challenge our usual ways of thinking. Further, many nouns and adjectives have been used to describe people—including here in this volume. While the word peasant is seldom used anymore,5 many other terms appear to be used nearly interchangeably. These include: poor, oppressed, marginalized, disadvantaged, peripheral, exploited, neglected, excluded, disempowered, dispossessed, disenfranchised, devalued, vulnerable, underprivileged, and many others. Even the term development-starved has been used (Moemeka, 1994). This set of labels suggests substantial variation in intended meaning and appropriate context of use. Some labels appear ethnocentric, depending on the context. Others appear more politically correct. Staudt (1991: 14) points out that in the context of development projects, the individuals to whom technologies or services are directed are commonly referred to as targets, suggesting military imagery, or as beneficiaries, suggesting welfare imagery and also assuming a positive outcome. While most scholars and practitioners of devcom want to avoid offence, it is clear that subtle—and sometimes blatant—forms of racism, sexism, and ethnocentrism do remain evident and must be continuously examined and exposed. In addition to theorizing relationships between communication and culture and examining the power of the dominant discourses, critical scholars have focused much attention on the role of large institutions in controlling global communications. They point out that the organizations that are most influential in disseminating information 14 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT are the largest ones, including private corporations, foundations, governments and their branches, and major political parties. These large political and economic institutions have power and influence over the manufacture and distribution of hardware, provision of training, decisions about message channels, the creation of messages, and export of cultural products (e.g., television programs) in a manner consistent with their values. Some of the largest organizations today are transnational corporations, which have economic power greater than many national governments (Ernberg, 1998; Harvey, 2005; Sparks, 2007). The inventions of the information age have strengthened critical scholars’ concerns and arguments about large political and corporate institutions, and their roles in influencing global cultural change supportive of Western or other elite economic, political, and ideological values. However, critical scholars concede that hegemony is never complete, and that resistance is possible. The Internet, in particular, allows greatly expanded possibilities for information access, information sharing, and coalition-building by interested communities including marginalized groups. Yet, possibilities translate into realities for the privileged few. Illiteracy and other barriers make Internet access still impossible or rare for the majority. Although statistics cited above show a global mobile phone penetration rate of nearly 100 percent, statistics are often misleading, as they do not count for multiple phone (or SIM card) registration by single users. In fact, routine mobile phone use is not yet available to everyone in the world. In sum, many scholars and practitioners continue to think of communication as a relatively linear process of information transmission, causing or contributing to changes in knowledge, attitudes, and/or behaviors. Media and communication models based on this understanding are called positivistic models and fall under the rubric of administrative uses of communication. Critical scholars view communication as a much more complex process, inseparable from culture, which is sustained and challenged by global and local economic, political, and ideological structures and processes. Models that follow this interpretive conclusion are considered critical approaches to communication and its effects. In this book, we will advance arguments on both sides of this coin, especially with reference to the role and effects of media and communication in directed change processes. Additionally, we will discuss nonmaterial perspectives on communication and development that reject both of these dominant approaches. DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 15 Development and Directed Change Like communication, development means different things to different scholars and practitioners. Therefore, the theory and practice of devcom cannot be meaningfully discussed without defining development as well. Although the importance of defining development should be obvious, relatively few studies of devcom bother to do so, leaving it to the reader to figure out the authors’ assumptions (Fair and Shah, 1997). Where definitions are provided, understandings about development vary greatly. Though most would agree that development means improving the living conditions of society, there has been much debate and disagreement on just what constitute improved living conditions and how they should be achieved. In later chapters, we will detail three perspectives or ways in which development and directed change have been thought about and practiced. Here we introduce them briefly. The first is modernization, based on neoclassical and neoliberal economic and social theories and promoting and supporting capitalist economic development. This perspective assumes that the Western model of economic growth is universally applicable, and that the introduction of modern technologies is important in development. Evidence of modernization can be readily observed in local-level projects that aim to persuade people to adopt technologies, and also in the macrolevel policies of governments and aid organizations that pressure poor countries and communities to sacrifice education, human, and social services for economic growth. The guiding theory specifies an incremental and causal process to this directed change toward an end that closely resembles the societies of advanced Western countries and communities in their political, economic, social, and cultural makeup. Critics claim that this vision of change describes social evolutionism. It subscribes to a Grand Narrative idea of social change in which human history like a grand story has an inherent purpose and design and moves forward in interlocking steps toward a grand end stage. This perspective is now widely criticized for its teleological bias to history and change. Critical perspectives constitute a second way of thinking about development. These perspectives challenge the economic and cultural expansionism and imperialism of modernization, and they argue for political and economic restructuring to produce more even 16 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT distribution of rewards in society. These perspectives do an excellent job of exposing and critiquing flaws of modernization, yet they have been less successful thus far in establishing alternative political and economic structures to the present neoliberal policy regimes. In addition, they seldom form the primary basis of funded development projects. However, they have incubated social movements relating to social justice, resistance communication, and other empowerment strategies that are proposing and working for alternatives to the neoliberal economic and political order. We will be describing communicative acts involved in social activism in greater detail in the final chapter of this book. Liberation or monastic perspectives constitute the third area of scholarship and practice in development and social change that we highlight in this volume. The Brazilian educator Paolo Freire (1973) is among the most well-known proponents of development as liberation. These perspectives derive largely from liberation theology, which prioritizes personal and communal liberation from oppression as the key to empowerment and self-reliance, which is the goal of development. Liberation theology assumes that all people want to become fully human, which means free and self-reliant, and that they have the internal capacity to develop themselves on their own terms. However, internal and external forms of oppression restrict their ability to do so. Therefore, the purpose of development is liberation from oppression, with a focus on both individuals and communities. However, liberation theology argues that the oppressors are oppressed too, because they do not realize that their oppression is dehumanizing. Therefore, the human potential of all is best reached by working toward universal human liberation. This mode of thought differs from the modernization and critical perspectives, in that the basic premises and goals are primarily spiritual, not economic. However, material realities are not ignored as in other theologies. Liberation theology recognizes links between material and nonmaterial needs and the impact of unmet material needs and economic exploitation on spiritual growth. Proponents of liberation perspectives do not necessarily side with critics of modernization. The basic premise is that individuals must be free to choose, and that their choice is not inevitably against the values of modernization. DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 17 It is important to emphasize that the three perspectives highlighted here and elsewhere in this book are neither mutually exclusive nor exhaustive. They certainly overlap, and we will argue that all three offer valuable insights and arguments. Further, there are other themes in the scholarship and practice of development that intersect with these three. These include the basic needs, sustainable development, and gender and development (GAD) perspectives or themes, all introduced in the early 1970s. The basic needs perspective argues for prioritizing the survival needs of the world’s poor—versus assuming that the benefits of infrastructure development will trickle down. Another significant theme has been the sustainable development or sustainable environment perspective. This perspective assumes that maintaining the biological diversity of the planet is essential to the survival of humanity. Hence, development that does not prioritize environmental sustainability is doomed to fail. A third major theme or perspective is women in development (WID) and, later, GAD. Proponents of this perspective demonstrate that most development aid has ignored or marginalized gender roles in project planning. As women’s roles are central to most development goals and can only be understood in context, failing to consider gender seriously jeopardizes project success. Empowerment Another key—and contested—concept that we explore in this book is empowerment. The construct of empowerment is mentioned frequently in devcom literature, and is often overused. The terms, exemplars, levels of analyses, and outcomes are seldom carefully explicated. Empowerment cannot be understood without first defining power. As scholars and practitioners, it is important that we consider power and control in development theory and practice. From Foucault (1980), we assume that power is meaningful only in social relations. It is constituted in a network of social relationships. There are several kinds of relational power (Rowlands, 1998: 13). These include: power over (controlling power), power to (generates new possibilities without domination), power with (collective power, power created by group process), and power from within (spiritual strength that inspires and 18 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT energizes others). Power over is especially relevant here, as it refers to those who have access to formal decision-making processes. Real change may not be possible unless we address power inequities between marginalized individuals, groups, and communities and the elites who make policy and aid decisions (Lewis, 2006; Ryan and Jeffreys, 2012). The other kinds of power—power to, power with, and power from within—may be instrumental in attaining greater power over. Like the other concepts explored in this chapter, empowerment means different things to different people. In recent years, much has been written about alternative, highly participatory, empowermentoriented approaches to development. These are varied and are not mutually exclusive.6 Jo Rowlands (1998) reviews the literature of empowerment, dividing it into three overlapping dimensions: personal empowerment (developing individual consciousness and confidence to confront oppression), relational empowerment (an increased ability to negotiate and influence relational decisions), and collective empowerment (collective action at the local or higher level to change oppressive social structures). Santi Rozario (1997) traces the history of the empowerment concept, which she argues has been overused. She divides empowerment into two primary models: One model “is based on empowering the individual, not on encouraging collective social action by the oppressed” (ibid.: 46).7 The other model is consistent with Paolo Freire’s approach, which emphasized “conscientization and radical social action” (ibid.: 47). Our interest is in Rozario’s latter model, consistent with Rowlands’ third model, that is, collective empowerment. Given the nature of this book, which can be described as the study and practice of directed social change, and given the power inequities in societies between and among individuals, groups, and organizations, our definition of empowerment is connected to the building and exercise of power for social change. In this book, empowerment is defined as the process by which individuals, organizations, and communities gain control and mastery over social and economic conditions (Rappaport, 1981), over democratic participation in their communities (Zimmerman and Rappaport, 1988), and over their stories. In our approach, there is an increased interest “in local autonomy, culture and knowledge; and the defense of localized, pluralistic grassroots movements” (Escobar, 1995b: 215). DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 19 Social J ustice While individual and collective empowerment are crucial in development, empowerment alone is not enough. This book, therefore, highlights our critique of the moral and ethical underpinnings of devcom methods and processes in the theoretical and policy-making realms. We point out ways in which the dominant paradigm assumes an ethnocentric conception of what progress should be. It describes the type of modernization that has been achieved in West European and North American countries. Also, it has looked at development from a macroeconomic perspective, viewing development as economic growth obtained through greater industrialization and globalization, and accompanying urbanization. Development performance has been gauged via measures such as Gross National Product (GNP) and per capita income levels and other dry economic indicators. Missing in this definition has been a broad-based conception of development. Any discussion of directed social change must include the physical, mental, social, cultural, and spiritual growth of individuals in an atmosphere free from coercion or dependency. Additionally, greater importance must be given to preserving and sustaining local cultures, as these constitute the ideological lens through which local communities structure their realities. Local cultures are not static. The fact that they have survived over centuries speaks of their intrinsic resilience and dynamic nature. Local cultures also may harbor solutions to many of the problems at the grassroots. To speak, therefore, of uprooting local cultures is not only naive but also ethically indefensible. Further, much development research and practice has been at the level of the nation state. Even research at the micro level has been concerned with bringing the nation, or some region thereof, into modernity. Missing here has been the recognition that individuals, groups, and communities require different strategies for development. If directed social change is to avoid creating greater misery for the majority at the periphery, then we need a process by which not only the mythical concept of a nation state is developed, but individuals and communities are also given the opportunity to create the type of society they want. Societies have different value systems and goals and must be free to determine their own definitions of the good 20 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT society—at each level—and how it may be achieved. This leads to our final and most significant point. The elites in powerful international institutions and governments, leaders in every nation, usually men, have always had the prerogative of deciding whether a definition and outcome of development is acceptable or not. In most countries, economic and political power are concentrated in the hands of a small elite. In such circumstances, any definition of development by elites will be in a direction opportune to their interests. In contrast, we argue that people who are the objects of policy need to be involved in the definition, design, and execution of the development process. Participation, in such a bottom-up orientation, would need to be more polyphonic. The concept of participation favored by many bottom-up strategies has been narrow: achieve widespread cooperation in adopting better health care practices, increased agricultural production, etc. True participation, however, would go beyond such goals to raise awareness and spark activism to confront and reform unequal social and spatial structures. We believe that any policy that continues to exploit the masses for the benefit of the rich and powerful is morally indefensible. Development must aim for more egalitarian distributions of benefits, as well as risks, across all social and economic classes. The model as enunciated in the dominant paradigm is inappropriate for most contexts. This model has served to increase the power and wealth of elites. It has led to much corruption as well. An alternative model that stresses decentralized development planning with effective local participation is more appropriate. Policy-making needs to prioritize human development, that is, to reduce human suffering and not increase it (Berger, 1974). We seek to deconstruct development in directed change efforts and policies through the lens of social justice. Elimination of injustice should be the goal of development and all directed social change. Therefore, we will examine social justice, a central concept and outcome of development, in some detail in the second and final chapters. However, here we state that our view of social justice—which involves not only freedom from the effects of unequal development, but also freedom to enhance the capacity of every person to live a meaningful and full life—should be a central consideration at all levels ranging from the local to global. DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 21 Development Communication The theory and practice of devcom as presented in this book reflect varied underlying views about media, communication, development, social justice, and empowerment. Devcom scholars and practitioners still tend to be split between those who view communication as an organizational delivery system and those who view communication more broadly, as inseparable from culture and from all facets of social change. Each orientation rests on certain assumptions consistent with divisions in views on concepts and processes previously discussed, such as development, social justice, and empowerment. The links are perhaps most evident in the case of the information transmission view of communication and the modernization perspective on development. For those who view communication as a process of message delivery, it is easy to view development as a process of modernization via the delivery and insertion of technologies, and/or via inculcating certain values, attitudes, and behaviors in a population. Communication and information are persuasive tools that can assist in the modernization process. Communication in the form of market research can assist in decisions about development goals and communication strategies. Persuasive or marketing communications subsequently sell development ideas and associated technologies to target audiences. In this sense, devcom under the modernization framework often is viewed as a process of persuasive marketing. Some examples of this would be biomedical-based health communication initiatives that seek specific behavior changes in their receivers/users, the diffusion of innovations approach, and social marketing approaches. In contrast, critical frameworks reject marketing models that aim to spread and support alien (and largely Western) technologies and economic, political values. Critical perspectives also view persuasive campaigns as manipulative and potentially harmful, often with inadequate attention to the cultural contexts in which people live. Additionally, proponents of these perspectives observe that large development projects involve multiple economic interests that may benefit others more than the population supposedly served. Further, corrupt leaders and government officials in developing countries find ways to enhance their wealth with foreign aid, hence increasing gaps 22 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT between haves and have-nots. For those with critical perspectives, therefore, devcom is a process of consensus building and resistance. It is not a linear process, but it must be historically grounded, culturally sensitive, and multifaceted, with attention to all the political, economic, and ideological structures and processes that comprise society. Examples of these would include participatory approaches in social change, social mobilization, advocacy communication, resistance communication, communication and liberation approaches, and participatory action research (PAR) approaches. Our dual emphasis on empowerment and social justice has direct implications for the objectives of devcom. Empowerment and social justice require more than just information delivery and diffusion of innovations. An important focus of development communicators will be to help in the process of giving agency to marginalized individuals, groups, and organizations. This calls for grassroots organizing and communicative social action by and for women, the poor, minorities, and others who have been consistently and increasingly marginalized in the process of social change. The implication for devcom, then, is a reconceptualization of its role. Greater importance will need to be given to the organizing value of communication (versus the transmission function) and the role of participative social action communication in empowering citizens to find solutions toward a more fair and just society. This will also imply a multidisciplinary focus. Devcom will need to borrow and adapt concepts and practices from social work, community psychology, community organization, critical education, and other areas engaged in empowering people, communities, and organizations. We will elaborate on these concerns and the communicative acts for achieving social justice in the final chapter. Liberation perspectives suggest yet another way of defining and operationalizing devcom. As the twin goals of development are assumed to be freedom from oppression and facilitating personal and communal empowerment, the devcom process must support these goals. Therefore, devcom is not message exchange, but rather emancipatory communication that will leave people free to determine their futures. That should include everyone participating in the process, not just the so-called target groups. The assumption is that once people are able to name their sources of oppression, as well as their sources of power, they will then be able to find solutions. The nature of emancipatory communication may vary. Many projects DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 23 grounded in liberation perspectives include spiritual practice, consistent with the religion and faith of the group involved. Additionally, Paolo Freire and other critical educators have advocated particular forms of dialogue (interpersonal and small group strategies) that will lead to expanded consciousness and power—and, therefore, liberation. These dialogic processes are heuristic, and enable participants to identify and explore issues that have meaning for them. Aside from differences in underlying assumptions about communication and development, the scholarship and practice of devcom vary greatly in strategic scope, that is, the range of methods and approaches included as part of devcom. Given the convergence of legacy mass media and new information technologies, it makes sense that all of these technologies would be relevant. Also significant are small-group, interpersonal, and pedagogic strategies of communication, as are traditional forms of communication and folk media. Some authors include religious and spiritual practice as crucial elements of devcom. Finally, devcom involves issues at all levels of consideration. What is possible at the micro level (individual and grassroots) often depends on constraints at the macro (national) and meso (global) levels. Yet, at the same time, action at the grassroots may influence higher-level policy and practice. We believe that no useful theory can ignore any level of analysis and practice. Yet, most devcom texts focus attention at one level, therefore, neglecting major issues (and populations) relevant to the process.8 Obviously, we cannot ignore serious problems of individual and local deprivation while waiting for modernization to be revised. Yet, development projects may not be able to empower certain classes of people until larger structures of global capitalism are first addressed (Bales, 1999, 2012). In his book, Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy, Bales (2012) reports research estimating 27 million economic slaves globally. These are not people exploited in sweatshops, but children and adults forced to work by violence and threats of violence. The violence and force do not come exclusively from the economic motives of business owners, but additionally from families who want consumer goods and are willing to sacrifice family members to get them. For instance, the title of Bales’ (1999) chapter on forced prostitution in Thailand is “One Daughter Equals One Television.” One should not also forget or condone the deplorable working conditions of workers in sweatshops and other such sites producing cheap 24 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT clothing for shoppers in the cities and in the rich countries.9 Clearly, these are problems requiring interventions at the global and the macro levels. They cannot be alleviated by grassroots projects alone. Third World Another term that appears in this book is Third World, which we use both for historic reasons and because the term has survived the Cold War. Further, as we discuss below language limitations alongside our privileged position as writers make choices of labels and categories always problematic and vulnerable to critique. Though we explain our understanding of the term Third World in the following pages and use it periodically in the book, conventional uses of the term are so pervasive and problematic that we have dropped the term from the title of this edition. What Is the Third World?10 John Isbister (1991) traces the Third World notion to 18th century France, where the three social classes were described as the first, second, and third estates. The first and second estates had the political power. The term third estate, or tiers état, became a revolutionary slogan during the French Revolution, which began in 1789 and sought to win and transfer political power from an elite few to the third estate. However, most scholars credit the French demographer Alfred Sauvy with first using the term Third World in a global sense (Isbister, 1991; Pletsch, 1981). Isbister (1991: 15) further notes that revolutionary theorists such as Jean-Paul Sartre used the term as “the banner of the hungry and oppressed.” Today, the primary connotation of Third World is underdeveloped, or simply poor. This picture has been somewhat complicated by the emergence of so-called newly industrializing countries (e.g., Taiwan, South Korea, Mexico, Brazil, Singapore, Hong Kong, and the Philippines), as well as the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) countries. So, the term Third World is an unstable concept. Yet, the global geographic distinctions remain primary. Most people DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 25 think of Third World as economically poor, and as places in Africa, most of Latin America, Asia, and the Caribbean. This geographic picture is reinforced by the most common Mercator map projections of the world on a flat surface (see Figures 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3). The Mercator projection was developed in the 16th century as an aid to navigation, but eventually it became a reference base on which to put any kind of geographical information. The projection maintains directional accuracy11 and reproduces shapes quite well. However, the price paid is that distances and areas are magnified toward the poles, so that Greenland, for instance, looks enormous compared to what it really is relative to southern landmasses such as Africa and South America. Many say that the Mercator projection promotes a Eurocentric view of the world. The Mercator map distorts the world to the advantage of European colonial powers. The North (i.e., North America, Greenland, and northern Europe) is actually 18.9 million square miles, which is half the size of The South (i.e., Central and South America, Africa, Asia, and Australia), which is 38.6 million square miles. However, in the Mercator Projection (Figure 1.1), it appears to be much larger on the map. Similarly, North America (area: 7.4 million square miles) appears to be larger than Africa (area: 11.6 million square miles) (see Figure 1.3). Therefore, it may be argued that this popular geographic visual reinforces a conception of the Third World as other, smaller, and apart. Later map projections, such as the Peters projection (Figure 1.4) attempt to correct for some of these problems. The Peters projection is an equal areas projection, meaning that all quadrants on the map represent equal land or sea areas. Also, the equator is in the center. However, here, shapes are distorted, so that land areas toward the equator are elongated in a north–south direction, and land areas toward the poles are elongated in an east–west direction. There are other map projections that similarly attempt to challenge our historic geographic biases, such as upside-down map projection (see Figure 1.5).12 Is there a better term than Third World, one with more positive connotations? Many prefer developing countries. Yet, that term implies that some countries are finished developing and have arrived, whereas others still struggle. Another is less-developed countries, which has some advantages in that it doesn’t give the impression that a Third exists distinct from First and Second. But, is the word less any The South: 38.6 million sq. miles Source: Arno Peters. Map of the World: Peters Projection. Leipzig, Germany: Akademische Verlagsanstalt, 1978. Distributed in North American by Friendship Press. Used by permission of Presbyterian Historical Society, Presbyterian Church (USA), Philadelphia, PA. Note: The Mercator map distorts the world to the advantage of European colonial powers. The North is half the size of The South, though it appears to be much larger on the Mercator map. Disclaimer: This figure is not to scale. It does not represent any authentic national or international boundaries and is used for illustrative purpose only. The North: 18.9 million sq. miles Figure 1.1 World Map: Mercator Projection Comparing the North and South Source: Arno Peters. Map of the World: Peters Projection © Akademische Verlagsanstalt. Distributed in North American by Friendship Press. Used by permission of Presbyterian Historical Society, Presbyterian Church (USA), Philadelphia, PA. Note: The Mercator map shows Europe larger than South America, which is almost double the size of Europe. Disclaimer: This figure is not to scale. It does not represent any authentic national or international boundaries and is used for illustrative purpose only. South America: 6.9 million sq. miles Europe: 3.8 million sq. miles Figure 1.2 World Map: Mercator Projection Comparing Europe and South America Africa: 11.6 million sq. miles Source: Arno Peters. Map of the World: Peters Projection © Akademische Verlagsanstalt. Distributed in North American by Friendship Press. Used by permission of Presbyterian Historical Society, Presbyterian Church (USA), Philadelphia, PA. Note: In the Mercator map, North America appears to be larger than Africa, which in fact is much larger. Disclaimer: This figure is not to scale. It does not represent any authentic national or international boundaries and is used for illustrative purpose only. North America: 7.4 million sq. miles Figure 1.3 World Map: Mercator Projection Comparing North America and Africa Source: Wikimedia Commons, http://commons.wikimedia.org Disclaimer: This figure is not to scale. It does not represent any authentic national or international boundaries and is used for illustrative purpose only. Figure 1.4 World Map: Peters Projection Source: Wikipedia.org Disclaimer: This figure is not to scale. It does not represent any authentic national or international boundaries and is used for illustrative purpose only. Figure 1.5 Upside-Down World Map Projection DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 31 more complimentary—and positive—than Third? The same criticism may be made of the term underdeveloped countries. Additionally, the term South—versus North—is frequently used. Simply scanning maps and statistics shows this categorization is overgeneralized, as many economically disadvantaged countries are in the North and some arguably First World countries are in the South, such as Australia and New Zealand. Finally, since the so-called Third World in fact constitutes two-thirds of the world, some have used the term two-thirds world to make the point. While all of these terms have some advantages, we note that all of them—developing countries, less-developed countries, South, and two-thirds world—still delineate Third World by geography. While characterizations such as poor or agrarian may be somewhat legitimate in distinguishing the Third World from the modern world, they greatly overemphasize the importance of these—usually economic— characterizations in comparison to others, ignoring gigantic differences between and among Third World countries on other dimensions such as history, cultural traditions, and language (Pletsch, 1981). Take, for example, Honduras, the Philippines, Nigeria, and Jamaica. Is it really meaningful to describe and analyze the role of communication in all of these countries as a group? Unless one takes specific national, regional, or local conditions into account, sensible practical applications are impossible. Another argument against the geographic conception is that using an entire country as the unit of analysis muddies the water. A Third World exists within the so-called First World and vice versa. For example, Tehranian (1994: 275) categorized India as a combination of First and Third Worlds. According to him, It can be divided into three distinct groups: (i) an underdeveloped agrarian and semi-urban population of about 350 million, (ii) a developing industrial population of about 100 million putting India among the top-10 industrial nations, and (iii) a developed middle class of nearly 400 million .… making it one of the largest middle classes in the world. Similar divisions may also be seen in industrialized countries such as the US where there are geographically and socially isolated impoverished groups. Many people and communities within the First World are disadvantaged in ways that are similar to the disadvantages of the so-called 32 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT Third World. As long as we use countries as units of analysis, we gloss over ethnic, regional, and class divisions within countries. At the same time, we recognize that the most extreme and widespread situations of poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, hunger, disease, sanitation, and refugee displacement are usually located in geographic areas conventionally labeled Third World. Globalization, which assumes greater connectivity between people and countries, also reveals global dynamics such as the sweatshops, mega-agricultural operations, strip mining operations, and other such ventures, which occur more often in the Third World where workers toil under unsafe and sometimes inhumane conditions. Therefore, much of what we say—and most of our examples—have geographic specificity consistent with conventional conceptions of Third World. We will use the terms developing countries, South, and Third World interchangeably when used in this sense. We also emphasize that the ideas and processes we describe are not always geographically specific to countries as units of analysis, and that development, communication, empowerment, and devcom can occur at local, glocal, and global levels. In post-development scholarship, the primacy of development to categorize people and countries is being increasingly replaced by other ways of seeing realities. To address all of these problems, some prefer to define Third World in terms of oppression by some combination of race, class, gender, and nation, which then automatically becomes inclusive of groups living within the so-called First World countries. We concur with this view of Third World, which is consistent with its revolutionary origins, connoting opposition to systematic disadvantage by class, race, ethnicity, language, and/or national origin. Therefore, we assume that development and devcom, the central concepts of this book, are not processes that occur a long way away, but occur everywhere, in virtually any community on the planet. Quite often in this text, we use community as our preferred unit of analysis, though this term is also fraught with challenges and contradictions, as communities may be spatial, grounded in a physical locality, and/or be affinity-based as in online communities. As in the case of countries as units of analysis, communities usually are highly stratified by ethnic, class, gender, language, and other groupings. As with other units, communities too give importance to some groups as opposed to others, usually along lines of power distribution. As development communicators, we are aware of these crucial challenges. DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 33 Our interest is in examining, eradicating, or minimizing existing inequalities in rights and access to resources and opportunities of the poorest, marginalized, and vulnerable sections of the population in communities. Globalization Globalization represents a relatively recent avatar of modernity, since the latter half of the 20th century, and is characterized by: the intensification of global relations, complex connectivity and networks of influence via new ICTs, and speedier transportation mechanisms. A distinguishing characteristic of globalization is the manner in which the basic ontological categories of time and space are organized and reorganized, which then influence our perceptions of place, distance, and proximity, and in turn provide the dynamism that leads to the expansion of the power and influence of dominant global institutions. It was Marshall McLuhan (1964) who introduced the idea of the global village. He was referring specifically to the power of electronic media such as radio and television to unify the modern world into one large community or village. McLuhan was a grand theoretician, an intellectual rabble-rouser. His observations are considered largely anecdotal by social science scholars. But, there is no denying the fact that by the early 1960s, and well before digitization and the Internet, McLuhan had grasped the idea of a global space. By indulging in a discursive examination of the social and ontological categories of time, place, and space in his writings about the media and communication vis-à-vis society and its culture, he had anticipated the future work of social scientists in globalization theory. McLuhan (1964) coined the pithy statement “The medium is the message” to show the intricate connections between the media of communication, society, and its culture. It is not so much the content of a medium but the medium itself that could transform the social, cultural, economic, or political contours of a society. Both McLuhan (1964) and Innis (1950) showed, for example, how societies dominated by oral media were essentially localized and centralized within a limited geographical region. However, the later development of papyrus 34 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT and then paper allowed delocalization and decentralization as communication and knowledge became more portable, and written laws and information could be distributed easily across distances. This allowed empires to expand across large geographical spaces and still maintain political and military control, and support commerce and trade. McLuhan (1964) and Innis (1950) were, thus, pointing to the characteristics of newer portable media to knit distant localities of an empire together, reduce the consciousness of a small community, and replace it with an imagined empire or kingdom. McLuhan’s work revealed how the efficient and time-saving characteristics of the new modes of transportation and communication such as print media, the telegraph, and later the audio–visual electronic media have created a feeling of proximity despite the constraints of huge spatial distances. Communication via electronic media (unlike print media) is instantaneous and total, appealing to the senses of sound and sight and similar to the oral communication of the imagined tribal village, which was instant, immediate, and complete. In McLuhan’s words, we are back in the local setting of the village, albeit a global village where space is phenomenologically reduced and reorganized using time. McLuhan (1964) also analyzed two other devices that have transformed social relations in the direction of greater global consciousness: the mechanical clock and money. Until modern times, most people kept time in terms of specific local activities, local events, etc., and it was difficult, if not impossible, to separate time from place. The mechanical clock replaced the conflation of time and place with an abstract scale in which time is measured in precise quantitative units and can be universally applied regardless of place. If you live within a single time zone, spatial markers make no difference to the time. Thus, the rich connections between time and specific social, cultural, or spatial markers are lost. Money, that can be easily transmitted and exchanged around the world, is the other universalizing device that has transformed relationships toward greater globalism. Later writings on globalization follow and extend McLuhan’s prophetic vision. Said’s (1978) landmark book Orientalism was among the first to expose and critique the power dynamic evident in a discourse of oppression under globalization. However, while the orientalism concept worked well to critique political–economic arrangements during the Cold War with clear east–west and north–south divides, DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 35 today’s global complexity requires new and much more nuanced postcolonial analyses of globalization discourses, accounting for historic and local context, as Garcia (1995), Tomlinson (1999), and Shome and Hegde (2002), among others, have pointed out. Globalization theorists question the proclivity in the social sciences with one form of spatiality, that is, the nation state, to the exclusion of others (Appadurai, 1996). We will elaborate on this and other concerns in future chapters. But, we would like to state briefly that the imagined concept of the nation often has glossed over significant ethnic, regional, linguistic, cultural, and class divisions within and between countries, as has the concept of Third World previously discussed. Certainly, the nation concept has been seized by elite groups and mainstream media organizations to support policies that showcase and defend a national culture and social reality (Sparks, 2007). The term global is often paired with the term local in globalization and social change theories as well as in popular culture, as in the expression “Think Global, Act Local.” Local is often conflated with the terms place and community, which we introduced earlier. In the modernization paradigm, local place (defined by language, identity, customs, religion, lifestyle, or culture) was often something to be eschewed in order to achieve modernization. A widely shared understanding of local is a small geographical (physical) place with strong interpersonal links among residents and attachments to the land and its customs. We share this perspective. However, we also accept that local could include groups that may not be tied to a physical place but are affinity-based, such as by language, religion, culture, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and myriad other associations (Appadurai, 1996). Later on, we will introduce and discuss global cosmopolitan politics, which employs a “broad definition of the local as an experience of power relationships rather than spatial proximity” (Sparks, 2007: 139). Robertson (1992) has been credited with coining the term glocalization to describe a process of deliberately indigenizing or adapting foreign culture for local purposes (see also Straubhaar, 2007; Szalvai, 2008). Post-development discourse suggests the primacy of local place and its other manifestations to “launch a defense of place in which place is constructed as the anchoring point for both theory construction and political action” (Escobar, 2000: 165). We will discuss later how in a post-development scenario, technological networks are being used to 36 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT boost the countervailing power of local places against the forces of globalization and in their wake creating powerful glocalities. We also argue that the phenomenon of globalization must be situated within the context of modernity. However, there is no unanimity among scholars as to the exact date of origin of the modern period.13 For our purpose, we concur with several sociologists in setting the emergence of the modern period around the beginning of the 17th century in Europe (Bauman, 1991; Giddens, 1990; Tomlinson, 1999). We will pick up the theme of globalization in Chapter 3 and further develop related ideas and arguments. Conclusion We recognize the failures and harmful outcomes of much development aid, yet we support the crucial importance of development interventions under many circumstances in improving people’s lives. Likewise, we agree with most critiques of devcom, yet we believe in its necessity and value, to the extent that legitimate critiques are addressed. We agree with those who argue—usually from critical, liberation, or feminist perspectives—that development should prioritize the needs of the most oppressed groups. Additionally, development must be culturally and historically sensitive, recognizing the nature and relative salience of key social divisions, such as gender, class, race, ethnicity, age, religion, and nation. Organization of the Book The book is divided into five parts. In Part I, the introductory chapter is followed by Chapter 2 which presents a brief overview of the evolution of the theory and practice of devcom. In Chapter 2, we also introduce new challenges in the areas of development and directed change and attempt to reappraise devcom theory and practice for social justice and empowerment outcomes. As the remainder of the book is divided conceptually versus historically, Part I aims to provide historical and conceptual maps for the volume as a whole. Part II focuses on modernization theory, including the dominant discourse under modernization and globalization. We begin, in DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 37 Chapter 3, with an introduction to modernization and globalization theories and discourses and their evolution from the early years of development to the present. Chapter 4 details strategies and practices of media and communication under modernization and globalization theories. Examples from historic and contemporary projects are provided. Part III discusses critical perspectives on communication and development. Chapter 5 critiques the dominant development discourse looking specifically at inherent biases that characterize the discourse. This chapter describes many of the consequences of this discourse, often negative, that flow directly from its biases. Challenges to modernization, including dependency and world systems theories, GAD, sustainable development, globalization and postcolonial theories and ideas are reviewed. Other alternative approaches are also suggested. In Chapter 6, we take a critical look at the media and communication strategies used to guide social change, especially under the rubric of modernization. We then discuss newer, alternative roles for communication in development, including the renewed interest in local cultures and the use of indigenous communication media for development and change. In addition, we examine uses of digital ICTs for development and social change. In Part IV, we turn to liberation perspectives on development. This is a departure from most devcom texts, which seldom extend their consideration beyond Freire’s basic ideas and methodologies on dialogic communication. We begin, in Chapter 7, with an introduction to liberation theology and its role in development and in freedom struggles globally. Although liberation theology often is associated with Roman Catholicism in Latin America, there have been liberation theologies associated with Protestantism (as in African American liberation theology), and with every major religion, including Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism. Areas of overlap between critical and liberation perspectives also are considered. Chapter 8 discusses the ways in which liberation theology has been operationalized in development projects. This necessitates attention to meditation and prayer as communication—forms of communication seldom considered in communication studies, yet crucially important to the daily lives and well-being of most of the world’s people. In Part V, the final section of the book, we take up the participatory paradigm in Chapter 9. In this paradigm, in contrast to the universality of earlier paradigms, priorities are highly contextual to the needs 38 COMMUNICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT and problems of specific communities. The participatory paradigm signifies an area in which countries and communities within them are expected to set their own priorities, goals, and standards, which may be unique to their contexts. This has been variously defined as Another Development and as multiplicity in one world. As opposed to the exogenous bias of the modernization paradigm, the new vision in the participatory paradigm is endogenous development, in which the people and communities involved are active agents in the process of directed change. In Chapter 10, we attempt to reconceptualize the role of devcom in facilitating empowerment. The key goal of development must be empowerment for social justice, whether at the individual, community, national, or global levels. Empowerment is multifaceted, in that creative survival requires both material and nonmaterial resources that vary by context. In Chapter 11, we focus on communication and social justice in the epoch of globalization. We summarize our views, synthesizing insights from previous chapters and arguing for new directions in theory and practice. In this chapter, we explicate and expand the term development, and we present a framework to organize communicative actions in directed change efforts in the contemporary context. We will examine core issues related to social justice in directed change, describe new terms and meanings, and operationalize them; we will then examine communicative actions that might help in meeting desired outcomes in directed change. Notes 1. Moemeka (1994: viii) sees DSC as a historic phase that has passed, that is, as the second of three stages in the place assigned to communication in development. The third stage is devcom. In contrast, others such as Jayaweera and Amunugama (1987: xix), Melkote (1991: 263), and James (1994: 331–332) distinguish devcom and DSC by level, scope, and nature of strategy, with devcom associated with macro-level hierarchical entities, and DSC with grassroots participatory entities. 2. Brenda Dervin and Robert Huesca (1997) sort meanings of participatory communication, distinguishing participation-as-end versus participation-asmeans assumptions in research and practice. 3. In contemporary contexts, most mass media outlets are very receptive to audience feedback through various channels such as Twitter, blogs, interactions on their websites, and other means. DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION, EMPOWERMENT, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 39 4. For analyses of textual conventions and reinforcing media values and traditions, see Gitlin (1980) and Steeves (1997). 5. We do occasionally use the term peasant in this text, but only in reports of research by others who use the term. 6. In addition to other lines of argument to be discussed, they include communitarian theory (e.g., Tehranian, 1994) and environmentally oriented perspectives, including ecofeminism. 7. She traces this model to Solomon (1976), who blamed internalized oppression for African Americans’ marginalization and powerlessness in the larger society. 8. Some texts focus primarily on macro-level issues of information flow (BoydBarrett, 2012; Reeves, 1993; Stevenson, 1994) and/or of communication and information technologies and policies (Castells 1996; Rao, 2005; Sussman and Lent, 1991; Woods, 1993), though from varying ideological perspectives. Moemeka’s (1994) collection also is directed at the macro level, emphasizing the role of world trade in development communication. Most other texts emphasize theory and strategy at more local levels, with little attention to global power structures. Several of these—Mody (1991), Nair and White (1993), White et al. (1994), Riano (1994), Jacobson and Servaes (1999), Palmer (2007), Hartnett (2007), and Carragee and Frey (2012)—tend (wi...