Development Journalism

As Thomas McPhail outlines clearly in Global Communication: Theories, Stakeholders, and Trends, the world has experienced four eras of colonialism; they are military, Christian, mercantile, and electronic colonialism. The powerful use the means of the time to gain and spread their influence and domination to weaker human societies and civilizations. When British Empire spread across the globe, they didn’t stop and think about what they were doing to indigenous people as they conquered and overtook foreign lands, such as Australia or the Americas. As in many of these lands during this era of colonialism, Aboriginal Australians were forced inland to more remote parts of the large island. Their development as a group was disrupted; their lifestyles changed. They had to adjust to a new world brought on by a more powerful sect of the human race.

Today is the age of electronic colonialism. No longer is military force or industrialization being used to control the world. Core nations, which are more dominant and powerful, have the ability to disrupt the lives of weaker and less influential nations through mind control. With the imbalanced flow of media and information, the West has the ability to dominate how people in other countries think, what they value, and why something they are doing is wrong.

Development journalism is an attempt to counteract electronic colonialism. There are many ways to look at this. Many believe trying to control what the media is saying about peripheral countries is a violation of journalistic rights and traditions. The purpose of journalism is to keep governments in line and to report on what is happening in the world.

When Dominant countries overtook the lands of indigenous people, nobody stopped them and said, “Hey these people have yet to grow scientifically and technologically. We shouldn’t try to disrupt their growth.” Over the course of history, the powerful will overtake the weaker. It’s just how it goes. Western media has this ability to influence the minds of people in peripheral countries, forcing them to question their governments and causing fragile nations to crumble or fight internally. It just seems like human nature to continue to flourish personally at the expense of others. Or, in this case, to point out to someone who is inferior exactly why her or she sucks. We can always apologize years later for the damage we did (Look at Australia: they just enacted “Sorry Day,” a public holiday that openly apologizes to Aborigines for past abuse and injustices).

Another way to look at it is a sports game. When playing against a much weaker opponent, it doesn’t help anyone if the stronger throttle the weaker. The developing team will never learn how to improve if they are just constantly getting hammered. The better team may be doing its job by playing hard and winning, but it just doesn’t seem right to destroy the other team.

Development journalism as a theory or a plan probably won’t work. After all, there is so much information flying around the world these days, nobody can hide. Everyone is talking about everyone and there’s very little stopping it. I think it comes down to the journalist or media organization. This isn’t something that can be internationally regulated. I would have a hard time publishing stories about a developing country’s never ending problems without being extremely thorough. McPhail refers to some international journalism as “parachute journalism.” This means the reporter spends little time in a foreign land. They collect the drastic, disastrous, or corrupt information or event and relay back to the rest of the world. If a journalist is going to analyze and report on happenings in LDC’s, they have to be sure to do a thorough and mindful job.

It is something to think about. It’s nearly impossible to balance the flow of information, but, as journalists with human brains in our skulls, we have to be mindful of what we are doing. We are infiltrating vulnerable and uneducated minds. It’s a claustrophobic world. Just because something is our job, doesn’t mean we can’t take a moment to consider the consequences. It might be against human nature, but who said we weren’t allowed to defy human nature?